973.7L63 
K1911 

1925 


Lincoln,  Abraham 

Lincoln;  Passages  from 
his  Speeches  and 
Letters;  with  an 
Introduction  by 
Richard  W.  Gilder 


LINCOLN  ROOM 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 
LIBRARY 


MEMORIAL 

the  Class  of  1901 


founded  by 

HARLAN  HOYT  HORNER 

and 

HENRIETTA  CALHOUN  HORNER 


LINCOLN 


This  reduced  copy  of  a  photograph  of  Abraham 
Lincoln    from  the  original    negative  taken  in 

is  here  published  by  special  permission 
given  to  the  Century  Co.  by  the  owner  r.e.jrvje 
B.  Ayres,  artist,  of  Philadelphia. 


^^ 


sC^T^S 


/ 
Li 


LINCOLN 

PASSAGES   FROM  HIS 
SPEECHES  and  LETTERS 


WITH  AN  INTRODUCTION  BY 
RICHARD  WATSON  GILDER 


THE   CENTURY    CO. 
NEW  YORK  .  mcmxxv 


Copyright,  1901,  1911,  by 
The  Century  Co. 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

Introduction w 

i  Lincoln's  Ambition     ...  3 

11  To  a  Friend S 

in  Advice  to  Young  Lawyers  9. 

iv  Slavery ij 

v  Slavery i& 

vi  The  Real  Southern  View 

of  Slavery 20- 

vn  The    Right    of    Self-Gov- 

ernment 26 

vm  Meaning  of  the  Declara- 
tion of  Independence      .     30 

ix  "A  House  Divided  against 

Itself  Cannot  Stand"         34 

x  Resistance     to    the     Su- 
preme Court 36 

xi  Repeal    of  the    Missouri 

Compromise       42' 

xii  Notes  for  Speeches  ...    47 

xm  The   Negro    Included    in 

vii 


PAGE 

the  Declaration  of   In- 
dependence   50 

xiv  The  Dred  Scott  Decision      53 

xv  The  Wrong  of  Slavery      .     58 

xvi  The  Principles  of  Jef- 
ferson       70 

xvii  A  Look  into  the  Future   .     74 

xviii  Autobiographical   ....     79 

xix  An  Appeal  to  the  South    .     84 

xx  Farewell  Address  at 
Springfield,  Illinois, 
February  ii,  1861     ...  108 

xxi  From    his    Reply    to    the 

Address  of  Welcome  at 
Indianapolis,  Indiana, 
February  ii,  1861     .     .     .  no 

xxii  Address  in  Independence 
Hall,  Philadelphia,  Feb- 
ruary 22,  1861 112 

xxiii  First  Inaugural  Address, 

March  4,  1861 n6 

xxiv  Letter  to  Horace  Greeley  144 

xxv  Dependence  upon  God    .     .  147 

xxvi  Meditation  on  the  Divine 

Will I4Q 

xxvii  Letter    to    General    Mc- 

Clellan 151 

viii 


PAGE 

xxvin  Telegram      to      General 

McClellan 158 

xxix  Emancipation  Proclamation  159 

xxx  Letter  to  the  Wokking- 
men  of  Manchester, 
England 166 

xxxi  Letter  to  General  Hooker  172 

xxxii  Letter  to  General  Grant  175 

xxxiii  Letter  to  J.  C  Conkling    177 

xxxiv  The  Gettysburg  Address  .  190 

xxxv  Response  to  a  Serenade     .  193 

xxxvi  Letter  of  Condolence  to 
Mrs.  Bixby  of  Boston, 
Massachusetts    ....  197 

xxxvii  Second  Inaugural  Address  199 


The  selections  in  this  volume  are  taken, 
by  permission,  from  the  authorized  edition  of 
"  The  Complete  Works  of  Abraham  Lin- 
coln," by  John  G.  Nicolay  and  John  Hay. 


IX 


INTRODUCTION 

Of  style,  in  the  ordinary  use  of 
the  word,  Lincoln  may  be  said  to 
have  had  little.  He  certainly 
did  not  strive  for  an  artistic 
method  of  expression  through 
such  imitation  of  the  masters,, 
for  instance,  as  Robert  Louis 
Stevenson's.  There  was  nothing 
ambitiously  elaborate  or  self- 
consciously simple  in  Lincoln's 
way  of  writing.  He  had  not  the 
scholar's  range  of  words.  He 
was  not  always  grammatically  ac- 
curate. He  would  doubtless  have 
been  very  much  surprised  if  any 
one  had  told  him  that  he  had  a 
"style  "  at  all.  And  yet,  because 
he  was  determined  to  be  under- 
stood, because  he  was  honest,  be- 
xi 


cause  he  had  a  warm  heart  and 
a  true,  because  he  had  read  good 
books  eagerly  and  not  coldly, 
and  because  there  was  in  him  a 
native  good  taste,  as  well  as  a 
strain  of  imagination,  he  achieved 
a  singularly  clear  and  forcible 
style,  which  took  color  from  his 
own  noble  character,  and  be- 
came a  thing  individual  and  dis- 
tinguished. 

He  was,indeed, extremely  mod- 
est about  his  accomplishments. 
His  great  desire  was  to  convince 
those  whom  he  addressed,  and  if 
he  could  do  this,— if  he  could 
make  his  views  clear  to  them,  still 
more  if  he  could  make  them  ap- 
pear reasonable, — he  was  satis- 
fied. In  one  of  his  speeches  in 
the  great  debate  with  Douglas  he 
said:  "Gentlemen,  Judge  Doug- 
las informed  you  that  this  speech 
of  mine  was  probably  carefully 
xii 


prepared.  I  admit  that  it  was. 
I  am  not  a  master  of  language ; 
I  have  not  a  fine  education  ;  I  am 
not  capable  of  entering  into  a 
disquisition  upon  dialectics,  as  I 
believe  you  call  it ;  but  I  do  not 
believe  the  language  I  employed 
bears  any  such  construction  as 
Judge  Douglas  puts  upon  it.  But 
I  don't  care  about  a  quibble  in 
regard  to  words.  I  know  what  I 
meant,  and  I  will  not  leave  this 
crowd  in  doubt,  if  I  can  explain 
it  to  them,  what  I  really  meant  in 
the  use  of  that  paragraph." 

Who  are,  to  Americans  at 
least,  the  two  most  interesting 
men  of  action  of  the  nineteenth 
century?  Why  not  Napoleon 
and  Lincoln?  No  two  men 
could  have  been  more  radically 
different  in  many  ways ;  but  they 
were  both  great  rulers,  one  ac- 
cording to  the  "  good  old  plan  " 
xiii 


of  might,  the  other  by  the  good 
new  plan  of  right :  autocrat — 
democrat.  They  were  alike  in 
this — that  both  were  intensely  in- 
teresting personalities ;  both  were 
moved  by  imagination  ;  and  both 
acquired  remarkable  power  of  ex- 
pression. One  used  this  power  to 
carry  out  his  own  sometimes  wise, 
sometimes  selfish,  purposes ;  to 
deceive  and  to  dominate ;  the 
other  for  the  expression  of  truth 
and  the  persuasion  of  his  fellow- 
men. 

Napoleon's  literary  art  was 
the  making  of  phrases  which 
pierced  like  a  Corsican  knife  or 
tingled  the  blood  like  the  call  of 
a  trumpet.  His  words  went  to 
their  mark  quick  as  a  stroke  of 
lightning.  When  he  speaks  it  is 
as  if  an  earthquake  had  passed 
under  one's  feet. 

Lincoln's  style  is  very  differ- 
xiv 


ent;  heroic,  appealing,  gracious 
or  humorous,  it  does  not  so 
much  startle  as  melt  the  heart. 
These  men  were  alike  in  this — 
that  they  learned  to  express  them- 
selves by  dint  of  long  practice,  and 
both  in  youth  wrote  much  non- 
sense. Napoleon  in  his  young 
days  wrote  romance  and  history ; 
Lincoln  wrote  verse  and  composed 
speeches.  Napoleon  failed  as  a 
literary  man;  Lincoln  certainly 
did  not  make  any  great  success  as 
a  lyceum  lecturer;  in  fact,  his 
style  was  at  its  best  only  when 
his  whole  heart  was  enlisted. 

Lincoln's  style,  at  its  best,  is 
characterized  by  great  simplicity 
and  directness,  which  in  them- 
selves are  artistic  qualities.  In 
addition  there  is  an  agreeable 
cadence,  not  overdone  except  in 
one  curious  instance, — a  passage 
of  the  Second  Inaugural, — where 
xv 


it    deflects    into    actual    rhythm 
and  rhyme : 

Fondly  do  we  hope — fervently  do  we 

pray- 
That  this  mighty  scourge  of  war  may 

speedily  pass  away. 

This  does  not  spoil,  but  it  som1 
what    injures,  one   of  the  mo.. 
memorable  of  his  writings. 

Then  there  is  in  Lincoln  a 
quaintness,  a  homeliness  and 
humor  of  illustration,  along  with 
a  most  engaging  frankness  and 
intellectual  honesty.  The  reader 
has  both  an  intellectual  and  moral 
satisfaction  in  the  clearness  and 
fairness  of  the  statement.  All 
this  affects  agreeably  the  literary 
form,  and  helps  to  give  Lincoln's 
style  at  times  the  charm  of  imagi- 
native utterance ;  for  imagination 
in  literature  is,  essentially,  the 
faculty  of  seeing  clearly  and  the 
xvi 


art  of  stating  clearly  the  actual 
reality.  There  was  nothing  of 
invention  in  Lincoln's  imagina- 
tion; his  was  the  imagination 
that  is  implied  in  a  strong  realiza- 
tion of  the  truth  of  things  in  the 
mind  of  the  writer  or  speaker. 

When      these      letters      and 
speeches  of  Lincoln  were  appear- 
ing in  the  papers  as  part  of  the 
news  of  the  day,  I  wonder  how 
many  of  us  who  were  then  living 
appreciated  them  from  the  liter- 
ary point  of  view.     I  remember 
that    at  a  certain   period,   some 
time  after  the  war,  I  seemed  for 
the  first  time  to  awake  fully  to 
the  attraction  of  Lincoln's  style. 
Beginning   with    the    inimitable 
speech   at   Gettysburg,  I   reread 
many  of  his   writings,   and   felt 
everywhere    his    genius    for    ex- 
pression. 

Where  and  how  did  Lincoln 
ii*  xvii 


gain  this  mastery  of  expression  ? 
He  said  of  himself: 

The  aggregate  of  all  his  schooling 
did  not  amount  to  one  year.  He 
was  never  in  a  college  or  academy  as 
a  student.  .  .  .  What  he  has  in  the 
way  of  education  he  has  picked  up. 
After  he  was  twenty-three  and  had 
separated  from  his  father,  he  studied 
English  grammar — imperfectly,  of 
course,  but  so  as  to  speak  and  write 
as  well  as  he  now  does.  He  studied 
and  nearly  mastered  the  six  books  of 
Euclid  since  he  was  a  member  of  Con- 
gress. He  regrets  his  want  of  edu- 
cation and  does  what  he  can  to  supply 
the  want. 

As  a  boy  at  home  we  are  told  that 
he  would  write,  and  do  sums  in 
arithmetic,  on  the  wooden  shovel 
by  the  fireside,  shaving  off  the 
used  surface  and  beginning 
again.  At  nineteen  it  is  re- 
corded that  he  "had  read  every 
xviii 


book  he   could   find,  and   could 
spell  down  the  whole  country." 
He  read  early  the  Bible,  ^Esop's 
"Fables,"    "Robinson    Crusoe," 
"Pilgrim's   Progress,"   a  history 
of  the   United   States,  Weems's 
"Life    of   Washington,"    Frank- 
lin's   "Autobiography";     later, 
the  life  of  Clay  and  the  works  of 
Burns   and    Shakspere.      Not    a 
bad  list  of  books  if  taken  seri- 
ously and  not  mixed  with  trash ; 
for,  of  course,  culture  has   to  do 
not  so  much  with  the  extent  of 
the  information  as  with  the  depth 
of  the  impression. 

The  youthful  Lincoln  pon- 
dered also  over  the  Revised 
Statutes  of  Indiana;  and  "he 
would  sit  in  the  twilight  and  read 
a  dictionary  as  long  as  he  could 
see."  John  Hanks  said :  "  When 
Abe  and  I  returned  to  the  house 
from  work  he  would  go  to  the 


XIX 


cupboard,  snatch  a  piece  of  corn- 
bread,  take  down  a  book,  sit 
down,  cock  his  legs  up  as  high 
as  his  head,  and  read."  At 
twenty-four,  when  he  was  sup- 
posed to  be  keeping  a  shop, 
Nicolay  and  Hay  speak  of  the 
"grotesque  youth,  habited  in 
homespun  tow,  lying  on  his  back, 
with  his  feet  on  the  trunk  of  the 
tree,  and  poring  over  his  book  by 
the  hour,  grinding  around  with 
the  shade  as  it  shifted  from  north 
to  east." 

The  youth  not  only  read  and 
thought,  but  wrote,  among  other 
things,  nonsensical  verses ;  and 
he  composed  speeches.  He  went 
early  into  politics,  and  soon  be- 
came a  thoughtful  and  effective 
speaker  and  debater.  Of  the 
language  that  Lincoln  heard  and 
used  in  boyhood,  says  Nicolay, 
in  an  essay  on  "  Lincoln's  Literary 

XX 


Experiments  "  printed  since  the 
"Life"  was  issued,  "though  the 
vocabulary  was  scanty,  the  words 
were  short  and  forcible."  He 
learned  among  men  and  women 
poor  and  inured  to  hardship 
how  the  plain  people  think  and 

feel. 

In     his    young    manhood    at 
Springfield  he  measured  wits  with 
other  bright  young  lawyers,  in 
plain  and  direct  language  before 
plain    and    simple-minded  audi- 
tors,  either    in    political    discus- 
sion or  in  the  court-room  ;  either 
in  the  capital  or  in  the  country 
towns  of  Illinois.     His  mathemat- 
ical and  legal  studies  were  an  aid 
to  precise  statement,  and  his  na- 
tive honesty  made  him  frank  and 
convincing  in  argument.     He  felt 
himself  to  be  a  poor  defender  of 
a   guilty  client,   and   sometimes 
shirked  the  job. 


xxi 


If  for  a  brief  period  in  his 
youth  he  indulged  in  anything 
resembling  the  spread-eagle  style 
of  oratory,  he  was  quick,  as  Nico- 
lay  declares,  to  realize  the  dan- 
ger and  overcome  the  tempta- 
tion. His  secretary  relates  that 
in  his  later  years  he  used  to  re- 
peat with  glee  the  description  of 
the  Southwestern  orator  of  whom 
it  is  said:  "He  mounted  the  ros- 
trum, threw  back  his  head,  shined 
his  eyes,  and  left  the  conse- 
quences to  God." 

By  practice  in  extemporary 
speaking  Lincoln  learned  to  do  a 
most  difficult  thing— namely,  to 
produce  literature  on  his  legs.  It 
is  difficult  thus  to  produce  litera- 
ture, because  the  words  must  flow 
with  immediate  precision.  It  is 
unusual  for  a  politician  to  go 
through  life  always  addressing 
audiences,  and  yet  always  avoid- 


xxii 


ing  the  orator's  temptation  to 
please  and  captivate  by  extrava- 
gant and  false  sentiment  and 
statement.  The  writer,  and  par- 
ticularly the  political  writer,  is 
tempted  to  this  sort  of  immo- 
rality, but  still  more  the  speaker, 
for  with  the  latter  the  reward  of 
applause  is  prompt  and  seductive. 
It  is  amazing  to  look  over  Lin- 
coln's record  and  find  how  seldom 
he  went  beyond  bounds,  how  fair 
and  just  he  was,  how  responsible 
and  conscientious  his  utterances 
long  before  these  utterances  be- 
came of  national  importance. 
Yet  it  was  largely  because  of  this 
very  quality  that  they  assumed 
national  importance.  And  then 
both  his  imagination  and  his  sym- 
pathy helped  him  here,  for  while 
he  saw  and  keenly  felt  his  own 
side  of  the  argument,  he  could 
see  as  clearly,  and  he  could  sym- 
xxiii 


pathetically  understand,  the  side 
of  his  opponent. 

Lincoln  was  barely  twenty- 
three  when,  as  a  candidate  for 
the  legislature,  he  issued  a  formal 
address  to  the  people  of  Sanga- 
mon County.  It  is  the  first  paper 
preserved  by  Nicolay  and  Hay  in 
their  collection  of  his  addresses 
and  letters.  Nicolay  well  says 
that  "as  a  literary  production  no 
ordinary  college  graduate  would 
need  to  be  ashamed  of  it." 

In  this  address  we  already  find 
that  honest  purpose,  that  "sweet 
reasonableness  "  and  persuasive- 
ness of  speech,  which  is  charac- 
teristic of  his  later  and  more  cele- 
brated utterances.  In  his  gath- 
ered writings  and  addresses  we 
find,  indeed,  touches  of  the  true 
Lincoln  genius  here  and  there 
from  the  age  of  twenty-three  on. 
In  the  literary  record  of  about  his 
xxiv 


thirty-third  year  occur  some  of 
the  most  surprising  proofs  of  the 
delicacy  of  his  nature — of  that 
culture  of  the  soul  which  had 
taken  place  in  him  in  the  midst 
of  such  harsh  and  unpromis- 
ing environment.  Reference  is 
made  to  the  letters  written  to 
his  young  friend  Joshua  F. 
Speed,  a  member  of  the  Ken- 
tucky family  associated  by  mar- 
riage with  the  family  of  the  poet 
Keats. 

In  Lincoln's  early  serious  verse 
the  feeling  is  right,  though  the 
art  is  lacking ;  but  the  verses 
are  interesting  in  that  they 
show  a  good  ear.  Note  has  been 
made  of  a  pleasing  cadence  in 
Lincoln's  prose;  and  it  is  not 
strange  that  he  should  show  a 
rhythmical  sense  in  his  verse. 
He  showed  a  good  deal  of  com- 
mon sense  in  not  going  on  with 
xxv 


this  sort  of  thing,  and  in  confin- 
ing the  publication  of  his  inade- 
quate rhymes  to  the  sacred  privacy 
of  indulgent  and  sympathetic 
friendship. 

We  come  now  to  Lincoln 
the  accomplished  orator.  His 
speech  in  Congress  on  the  28th 
of  January,  1848,  on  the  Mexican 
War,  strikes  the  note  of  solemn 
verity  and  of  noble  indignation 
which  a  little  later  rang  through 
the  country  and,  with  other 
voices,  aroused  it  to  a  sense  of 
impending  danger. 

It  was  in  1851  that  he  wrote 
some  family  letters  that  not  only 
show  him  in  a  charming  light  as 
the  true  and  wise  friend  of  his 
shiftless  stepbrother,  but  the  af- 
fectionate guardian  of  his  step- 
mother, who  had  been  such  a 
good  mother  to  him.  There  is 
something  Greek  in  the  clear 
xx  vi 


phrase  and  pure  reason  of  these 
epistles. 

Dear  Brother  :  When  I  came 
into  Charleston  day  before  yesterday, 
I  learned  that  you  are  anxious  to  sell 
the  land  where  you  live  and  move  to 
Missouri.  I  have  been  thinking  of 
this  ever  since,  and  cannot  but  think 
such  a  notion  is  utterly  foolish. 
What  can  you  do  in  Missouri  better 
than  here?  Is  the  land  any  richer? 
Can  you  there,  any  more  than  here, 
raise  corn  and  wheat  and  oats  without 
work?  Will  anybody  there,  any 
more  than  here,  do  your  work  for 
you?  If  you  intend  to  go  to  work, 
there  is  no  better  place  than  right 
where  you  are ;  if  you  do  not  intend 
to  go  to  work,  you  cannot  get  along 
anywhere.  Squirming  and  crawling 
about  from  place  to  place  can  do  no 
good.  You  have  raised  no  crop  this 
year ;  and  what  you  really  want  is  to 
sell  the  land,  get  the  money,  and 
spend  it.  Part  with  the  land  you 
xxvii 


have,  and,  my  life  upon  it,  you  will 
never  after  own  a  spot  big  enough 
to  bury  you  in. 

We  find  in  his  Peoria  speech  of 
1854  a  statement  of  his  long  con- 
tention against  the  extension  of 
slavery,  and  a  proof  of  his  ability 
to  cope  intellectually  with  the 
ablest  debaters  of  the  West.  His 
Peoria  speech  was  in  answer  to 
Judge  Douglas,  with  whom  four 
years  afterward  he  held  the  far- 
resounding  debate.  Lincoln  was 
now  forty-five  years  old,  and  his 
oratory  contains  that  moral  im- 
petus which  was  to  give  it  greater 
and  greater  power. 

In  1856  occurred  the  Fremont 
and  Dayton  campaign,  which 
came  not  so  very  far  from  being 
the  Fremont  and  Lincoln  cam- 
paign. In  a  speech  in  this  cam- 
paign he  used  a  memorable 
xxvlii 


phrase:  "All  this  talk  about  the 
dissolution  of  the  Union  is  hum- 
bug, nothing  but  folly.  We  do 
not  want  to  dissolve  the  Union; 
yon  shall  not."  In  his  famous 
speech  delivered  at  Springfield, 
Illinois,  at  the  close  of  the  Re- 
publican State  Convention  of 
1858, — in  which  he  had  been 
named  as  candidate  for  United 
States  senator,— the  skilful  and 
serious  orator  rises  not  merely 
to  the  broad  level  of  nationality,, 
but  to  the  plane  of  universal  hu- 
manity. As  events  thicken  and 
threaten,  his  style  becomes  more 
solemn.  So  telling  at  last  his 
power  of  phrase  that  it  would 
hardly  seem  to  be  an  exaggera- 
tion to  declare  that  the  war  itself 
was  partly  induced  by  the  fact 
that  Abraham  Lincoln  was  able 
to  express  his  pregnant  thoughts 
with  the  art  of  a  master.  How 
xxlx 


familiar  now  these  words  of 
prophecy : 

"  A  house  divided  against  itself 
cannot  stand."  I  believe  this  gov- 
ernment cannot  endure  permanently 
half  slave  and  half  free.  I  do  not 
expect  the  Union  to  be  dissolved — I 
do  not  expect  the  house  to  fall — but 
I  do  expect  it  will  cease  to  be  divided. 

The  cadence  of  Lincoln's  prose 
with  its  burden  of  high  hope, 
touched  with  that  heroism  which 
is  so  near  to  pathos,  reminds  one 
of  the  Leitmotif,  the  "  leading 
motive "  in  symphony  and 
music-drama  of  which  musicians 
make  use,  and  which  is  espe- 
cially characteristic  of  the  man- 
ner of  Wagner: 

Two  years  ago  the  Republicans  of 
the  nation  mustered  over  thirteen 
hundred  thousand  strong.  We  did 
this  under  the  single  impulse  of  re- 

XXX 


sistance  to  a  common  danger,  with 
every  external  circumstance  against 
us.  Of  strange,  discordant,  and  even 
hostile  elements,  we  gathered  from 
the  four  winds,  and  formed  and 
fought  the  battle  through,  under  the 
constant  hot  fire  of  a  disciplined, 
proud,  and  pampered  enemy.  Did 
we  brave  all  then  to  falter  now — 
now,  when  that  same  enemy  is  waver- 
ing, dissevered,  and  belligerent? 
The  result  is  not  doubtful.  We  shall 
not  fail — if  we  stand  firm,  we  shall 
not  fail.  Wise  counsels  may  accel- 
erate or  mistakes  delay  it,  but,  sooner 
or  later,  the  victory  is  sure  to  come. 

We  have  arrived  now  at  the 
period  of  the  joint  debate  be- 
tween Lincoln  and  Douglas.  In 
Lincoln  we  have  the  able  and 
practised  attorney,  with  one  side 
of  his  nature  open  to  the  eternal ; 
in  Douglas  the  skilful  lawyer, 
adroit  and  ambitious,  not  easily 
xxxi 


moved  by  the  moral  appeals 
which  so  quickly  took  hold  upon 
Lincoln,  but  a  man  capable  of 
right  and  patriotic  action  when 
the  depths  of  his  nature  were 
stirred. 

One  of  the  most  characteristic 
qualities  of  Lincoln's  expression 
is  its  morality,  its  insight,  its  pro- 
phecy ;  and  in  the  now  famous  de- 
bate he  reached  well-nigh  the 
fullness  of  his  power  to  put  great 
thoughts  into  fitting  language. 
Straight  his  words  went  into  the 
minds  and  hearts  of  eagerly 
listening  crowds.  The  question, 
he  contended,  was  as  to  the  right 
or  the  wrong  of  slavery : 

That  [he  said]  is  the  real  issue. 
That  is  the  issue  that  will  continue 
in  this  country  when  these  poor 
tongues  of  Judge  Douglas  and  myself 
shall  be  silent.  It  is  the  eternal 
xxxii 


struggle  between  these  two  principles 
—right  and  wrong— throughout  the 
world.  They  are  the  two  principles 
that  have  stood  face  to  face  from  the 
beginning  of  time,  and  will  ever  con- 
tinue to  struggle.  The  one  is  the 
common  right  of  humanity,  and  the 
other  the  divine  right  of  kings. 

A  recent  biographer  of  Lincoln, 
Mr.  John  T.  Morse,  Jr.,  says  that 
"it  is  just  appreciation,  not  ex- 
travagance, to  say  that  the  cheap 
and  miserable  little  volume,  now 
out  of  print,  containing  in  bad 
newspaper  type  '  The  Lincoln  and 
Douglas  Debates,'  holds  some  of 
the  masterpieces  of  oratory  of  all 
ages  and  nations." 

It  is  interesting  to  recall  the 
fact  that,  in  the  pause  of  his  af- 
fairs after  the  debate  with  Doug- 
las, Lincoln  took  up  the  then 
popular  custom  of  lyceum-lec- 
turing.  In  the  very  year  before 
Hi*  xxxiii 


his  election  to  the  Presidency  the 
great  statesman  and  orator  was 
engaged  in  delivering  a  totally 
uninspired  lecture  on  "Discov- 
eries, Inventions,  and  Improve- 
ments "  in  towns  near  Spring- 
field, and  in  Springfield  itself  on 
Washington's  Birthday  in  the 
fateful  year  of  i860.  There  was 
little  in  this  lecture  to  attract  the 
slightest  attention  ;  and  while  it 
may  have  given  satisfaction 
among  neighbors,  it  could  never 
have  added  to  his  fame.  Yet 
when  he  had  the  opportunity  of 
an  engagement  to  lecture  on  po- 
litical subjects  in  this  same  month 
of  February,  he  made  what  is  now 
known  as  the  "great  address  "  at 
Cooper  Union.  Soon  after  this 
came  his  nomination,  then  his 
election  to  the  Presidency  of  the 
United  States ;  and  with  these 
events  he  may  be  said  to  have 
xxxiv 


resumed  his  true  literary  career, 
for  (as  I  have  said)  his  style  was 
at  its  best  only  when  he  was 
dealing  with  a  cause  in  which 
his  whole  heart  was  enlisted. 

By  way  of  contrast  to  what  has 
passed  and  is  to  come,  let  us  cull 
some  of  the  passages  in  which 
shone  Lincoln's  wit  and  humor. 
How  pleasing  it  is  to  know  that 
his  melancholy  nature,  his  bur- 
dened spirit,  were  refreshed 
with  glimpses— often  storms— of 
mirth !  They  say  that  to  see 
Lincoln  laugh  was  an  amazing 
sight. 

The  humor  of  which  we  learn 
so  much  from  those  who  heard 
him  tell  his  quaint  and  often 
Rabelaisian  stories  came  out 
sharply  and  roughly  in  one  of  his 
congressional  speeches,  in  which 
he  referred  with  grim  sarcasm  to 
General    Cass's    military    record 

XXXV 


as  used  for  political  ammunition. 
Here  are  some  later  touches  of 
his  wit :  "The  plainest  print  can- 
not be  read  through  a  gold 
eagle."  "If  you  think  you  can 
slander  a  woman  into  loving  you, 
or  a  man  into  voting  for  you,  try 
it  till  you  are  satisfied."  Again  : 
"  Has  Douglas  the  exclusive  right 
in  this  country  to  be  on  all  sides 
of  all  questions?"  Again:  "In 
his  numerous  speeches  now  being 
made  in  Illinois,  Senator  Douglas 
regularly  argues  against  the  doc- 
trine of  the  equality  of  men  ;  and 
while  he  does  net  draw  the  con- 
clusion that  the  superiors  ought 
to  enslave  the  inferiors,  he  evi- 
dently wishes  his  hearers  to  draw 
that  conclusion.  He  shirks  the 
responsibility  of  pulling  the  house 
down,  but  he  digs  under  it  that 
it  may  fall  of  its  own  weight." 
"The  enemy  would  fight,"  said 
xxxvi 


the  President  once,  in  a  letter  to 
General  Hooker,  "in  intrench- 
ments,  and  have  you  at  a  disad- 
vantage, and  so,  man  for  man, 
worst  you  at  that  point,  while  his 
main  force  would  in  some  way  be 
getting  an  advantage  of  you 
northward.  In  one  word,  I  would 
not  take  any  risk  of  being  en- 
tangled upon  the  river  like  an  ox 
jumped  half  over  a  fence  and  lia- 
ble to  be  torn  by  dogs  front  and 
rear  without  a  fair  chance  to  gore 
one  way  or  kick  the  other."  It 
was  also  to  Hooker  that  he  wrote  : 
"Only  those  generals  who  gain 
successes  can  set  up  dictators. 
What  I  now  ask  of  you  is  military 
success,  and  I  will  risk  the  dicta- 
torship." 

In  a  letter  written  in  1859  to  a 
Boston  committee  he  said,  in  de- 
scribing a  change  in  party  stan- 
dards :   "  I  remember  being  once 
xxxvii 


much  amused  at  seeing  two  par- 
tially intoxicated  men  engaged  in 
a  fight  with  their  greatcoats  on, 
which  fight,  after  a  long  and  ra- 
ther harmless  contest,  ended  in 
each  having  fought  himself  out 
of  his  own  coat  and  into  that  of 
the  other.  If  the  two  leading 
parties  of  this  day  are  really  iden- 
tical with  the  two  in  the  days  of 
Jefferson  and  Adams,  they  have 
performed  the  same  feat  as  the 
two  drunken  men."  And  this  is 
from  his  very  last  public  address : 
"Concede  that  the  new  govern- 
ment of  Louisiana  is  only  to  what 
it  should  be  as  the  egg  is  to  the 
fowl,  we  shall  sooner  have  the 
fowl  by  hatching  the  egg  than  by 
smashing  it." 

A  specimen  of  his  spoken  wit 
is  the  story  told  of  his  reply  to 
the  countryman  who  at  a  recep- 
tion said,— in  the  prepared  speech 
xxxviii 


that  patriots  so  often  shoot  at  the 
President  as  they  plunge  past  him 
in  the  processions  through  the 
White  House, — "  I  believe  in  God 
Almighty  and  Abraham  Lin- 
coln." "You  're  more  than  half 
right,"  quickly  answered  the 
President.  When,  at  a  confer- 
ence with  Confederate  leaders,  he 
was  reminded  by  the  Southern 
commissioner,  Mr.  Hunter,  that 
Charles  I  entered  into  an  agree- 
ment with  "parties  in  arms 
against  the  government,"  Lincoln 
said :  "I  do  not  profess  to  be 
posted  in  history.  In  all  such 
matters  I  will  turn  you  over  to 
Seward.  All  I  distinctly  recollect 
about  the  case  of  Charles  I  is  that 
he  lost  his  head." 

Lincoln  was  elected  to  the  Presi- 
dency of  a  country  on  the  verge 
of  civil  war.     In  his  farewell  to 
xxxix 


his  fellow-townsmen  sounds  again 
that  musical  "motive"  of  which 
I  have  spoken,  recurring  like 
the  refrain  of  a  sad  but  heroic 
poem.  Remember  the  passage 
quoted  before.  It  occurred  in  his 
speech  of  1858:  "The  result  is 
not  doubtful.  We  shall  not  fail 
— if  we  stand  firm,  we  shall  not 
fail.  Wise  counsels  may  accel- 
erate or  mistakes  delay  it,  but, 
sooner  or  later,  the  victory  is  sure 
to  come." 

In  parting  from  his  old  neigh- 
bors he  said : 

Here  my  children  have  been  born, 
and  one  is  buried.  I  now  leave,  not 
knowing  when  or  whether  ever  I  may 
return,  with  a  task  before  me  greater 
than  that  which  rested  upon  Wash- 
ington. Without  the  assistance  of 
that  Divine  Being  who  ever  attended 
him  I  cannot  succeed.  With  that 
assistance  I  cannot  fail.  Trusting  in 
xl 


him,  who  can  go  with  me  and  re- 
main with  you,  and  be  everywhere 
for  good,  let  us  confidently  hope  that 
all  will  yet  be  well. 

The  First  Inaugural  concludes 
with  a  passage  of  great  tender- 
ness. We  learn  from  Nicolay 
and  Hay  that  the  suggestion  of 
that  passage,  its  first  draft  indeed, 
came  from  Seward.  But  com- 
pare this  first  draft  with  the  pas- 
sage as  amended  and  adopted  by 
Lincoln  !     This  is  Seward's : 

I  close.  We  are  not,  we  must  not 
be,  aliens  or  enemies,  but  fellow- 
countrymen  and  brethren.  Although 
passion  has  strained  our  bonds  of  af- 
fection too  hardly,  they  must  not,  I 
am  sure  they  will  not,  be  broken. 
The  mystic  chords  which,  proceeding 
from  so  many  battle-fields  and  so 
many  patriot  graves,  pass  through  all 
the  hearts  and  all  hearths  in  this 
broad  continent  of  ours,  will  yet  again 
xli 


harmonize  in  their  ancient  music 
when  breathed  upon  by  the  guardian 
angel  of  the  nation. 

And  this  is  Lincoln's : 

I  am  loath  to  close.  We  are  not 
enemies,  but  friends.  We  must  not 
be  enemies.  Though  passion  may 
have  strained,  it  must  not  break  our 
bonds  of  affection.  The  mystic 
chords  of  memory,  stretching  from 
every  battle-field  and  patriot  grave 
to  every  living  heart  and  hearthstone 
all  over  this  broad  land,  will  yet  swell 
the  chorus  of  the  Union  when  again 
touched,  as  surely  they  will  be,  by 
the  better  angels  of  our  nature. 

There  is  in  this  last  something 
that  suggests  music ;  again  we 
hear  the  strain  of  the  Leitmotif. 
Strangely  enough,  in  1858  Lin- 
coln himself  had  used  a  figure 
not  the  same  as,  but  suggestive 
of,  this  very  one  now  given  by 
xlii 


Seward.  He  was  speaking  of  the 
moral  sentiment,  the  sentiment 
of  equality,  in  the  Declaration  of 
Independence.  "  That"  he  said, 
"is  the  electric  chord  in  that  Dec- 
laration, that  links  the  hearts  of 
patriotic  and  liberty-loving  men 
together,  that  will  link  those  pa- 
triotic hearts  as  long  as  the  love 
of  freedom  exists  in  the  minds  of 
men  throughout  the  world." 

In  the  final  paragraph  of  the 
Second  Inaugural  we  find  again 
the  haunting  music  with  which 
the  First  Inaugural  closed.  On 
the  heart  of  what  American — 
North  or  South — are  not  the 
words  imprinted? 

With  malice  toward  none ;  with 
charity  for  all ;  with  firmness  in  the 
right,  as  God  gives  us  to  see  the 
right,  let  us  strive  on  to  finish  the 
work  we  are  in  ;  to  bind  up  the  na- 
tion's wounds  ;  to  care  for  him  who 
xliii 


shall  have  borne  the  battle,  and  for 
his  widow,  and  his  orphan — to  do 
all  which  may  achieve  and  cherish  a 
just  and  lasting  peace  among  our- 
selves, and  with  all  nations. 

As  the  great  musician  brings 
somewhere  to  its  highest  expres- 
sion the  motive  which  has  been 
entwined  from  first  to  last  in  his 
music-drama,  so  did  the  expres- 
sion of  Lincoln's  passion  for  his 
country  reach  its  culmination  in 
the  tender  and  majestic  phrases 
of  the  Gettysburg  Address : 

In  a  larger  sense,  we  cannot 
dedicate  —  we  cannot  consecrate — 
we  cannot  hallow — this  ground. 
The  brave  men,  living  and  dead, 
who  struggled  here,  have  conse- 
crated it  far  above  our  poor  power 
to  add  or  detract.  The  world  will 
little  note  nor  long  remember  what 
we  say  here,  but  it  can  never  forget 
what  they  did  here.  It  is  for  us, 
xliv 


the  living,  rather,  to  be  dedicated 
here  to  the  unfinished  work  which 
they  who  fought  here  have  thus  far 
so  nobly  advanced.  It  is  rather  for 
us  to  be  here  dedicated  to  the  great 
task  remaining  before  us — that  from 
these  honored  dead  we  take  increased 
devotion  to  that  cause  for  which 
they  gave  the  last  full  measure  of 
devotion ;  that  we  here  highly  re- 
solve that  these  dead  shall  not  have 
died  in  vain  ;  that  this  nation,  under 
God,  shall  have  a  new  birth  of  free- 
dom ;  and  that  government  of  the 
people,  by  the  people,  for  the  people, 
shall  not  perish  from  the  earth. 

But  there  is  a  letter  of  Lin- 
coln's which  may  well  be  asso- 
ciated with  the  Gettysburg 
Address.  It  was  written,  just 
one  year  after  the  delivery  of 
the  Address,  to  a  mother  who, 
the  President  heard,  had  lost  five 
sons  in  the  army.     I  believe  the 

X]t7 


number  was  not  so  large,  though 
that  does  not  matter. 

Executive  Mansion, 
Washington, 

November  21,  1864. 
Mrs.  Bixby,  Boston,  Massachusetts. 
Dear  Madam  :  I  have  been 
shown  in  the  files  of  the  War  De- 
partment a  statement  of  the  Adjutant- 
General  of  Massachusetts  that  you 
are  the  mother  of  five  sons  who  have 
died  gloriously  on  the  field  of  battle. 
I  feel  how  weak  and  fruitless  must 
be  any  words  of  mine  which  should 
attempt  to  beguile  you  from  the 
grief  of  a  loss  so  overwhelming. 
But  I  cannot  refrain  from  tendering 
to  you  the  consolation  that  may  be 
found  in  the  thanks  of  the  Republic 
they  died  to  save.  I  pray  that  our 
heavenly  Father  may  assuage  the 
anguish  of  your  bereavement,  and 
leave  you  only  the  cherished  memory 
of  the  loved  and  lost,  and  the  solemn 
pride  that  must  be  yours  to  have 
xlvi 


laid  so  costly  a  sacrifice   upon   the 
altar  of  freedom. 

Yours  very  sincerely 

and  respectfully, 
Abraham  Lincoln. 

This  letter  of  consolation  in  its 
simplicity  and  fitness  again  re- 
calls the  Greek  spirit.  It  is  like 
one  of  those  calm  monuments  of 
grief  which  the  traveler  may  still 
behold  in  that  small  cemetery 
under  the  deep  Athenian  sky, 
where  those  who  have  been  dead 
so  many  centuries  are  kept  alive 
in  the  memories  of  men  by  an  art 
which  is  immortal. 


xlvii 


LINCOLN 


LINCOLN 


Lincoln's  ambition 


From  an  address  to  the  people  of  Sangamon 
County,  issued  March  9,  1832. 

Every  man  is  said  to  have  his 
peculiar  ambition.  Whether  it 
be  true  or  not,  I  can  say,  for 
one,  that  I  have  no  other  so 
great  as  that  of  being  truly  es- 
teemed of  my  fellow-men,  bv 
rendering  myself  worthy  of 
their  esteem.  How  far  I  shall 
succeed  in  gratifying  this  am- 
bition is  yet  to  be  developed. 
I  am  young,  and  unknown  to 
many  of  you.  I  was  born,  and 
have  ever  remained,  in  the 
most  humble  walks  of  life.  I 
have  no  wealthy  or  popular  re- 

3 


lations  or  friends  to  recommend 
me.  My  case  is  thrown  ex- 
clusively upon  the  independent 
voters  of  the  country ;  and,  if 
elected,  they  will  have  con- 
ferred a  favor  upon  me  for 
which  I  shall  be  unremitting  in 
my  labors  to  compensate.  But 
if  the  good  people  in  their  wis- 
dom shall  see  fit  to  keep  me  in 
the  background,  I  have  been 
too  familiar  with  disappoint- 
ments to  be  very  much  cha- 
grined. 


II 


TO    A    FRIEND 


From   a   letter   to   Joshua    F.  Speed,  dated 
February  3,  1842. 

You  well  know  that  I  do  not  feel 
my  own  sorrows  much  more 
keenly  than  I  do  yours,  when  I 
know  of  them ;  and  yet  I  as- 
sure you  I  was  not  much  hurt 
by  what  you  wrote  me  of  your 
excessively  bad  feeling  at  the 
time  you  wrote. 

Not  that  I  am  less  capable 
of  sympathizing  with  you  now 
than  ever,  not  that  I  am  less 
your  friend  than  ever,  but  be- 
cause I  hope  and  believe  that 
your  present  anxiety  and  dis- 
tress about  her  health  and  her 
life  must  and  will  forever  ban- 


ish  those  horrid  doubts  which 
I  know  you  sometimes  felt  as 
to  the  truth  of  your  affection 
for  her.  If  they  can  once  and 
forever  be  removed  (and  I  al- 
most feel  a  presentiment  that 
the  Almighty  has  sent  your 
present  affliction  expressly  for 
that  object),  surely  nothing  can 
come  in  their  stead  to  fill  their 
immeasurable  measure  of  mis- 
ery. 

The  death-scenes  of  those 
we  love  are  surely  painful 
enough ;  but  these  we  are  pre- 
pared for  and  expect  to  see : 
they  happen  to  all,  and  all 
know  they  must  happen.  Pain- 
ful as  they  are,  they  are  not  an 
unlooked-for  sorrow.  Should 
she,  as  you  fear,  be  destined  to 
an  early  grave,  it  is  indeed  a 
great  consolation  to  know  that 
she  is  so  well  prepared  to  meet 
it.  Her  religion,  which  you 
once   disliked  so  much,  I  will 


venture  you  now  prize  most 
highly.  But  I  hope  your  mel- 
ancholy bodings  as  to  her  early 
death  are  not  well  founded.  I 
even  hope  that  ere  this  reaches 
you  she  will  have  returned  with 
improved  and  still  improving 
health,  and  that  you  will  have 
met  her,  and  forgotten  the  sor- 
rows of  the  past  in  the  enjoy- 
ments of  the  present. 

I  would  say  more  if  I  could, 
but  it  seems  that  I  have  said 
enough.  It  really  appears  to 
me  that  you  yourself  ought  to 
rejoice,  and  not  sorrow,  at  this 
indubitable  evidence  of  your 
undying  affection  for  her. 
Why,  Speed,  if  you  did  not 
love  her,  although  you  might 
not  wish  her  death,  you  would 
most  certainly  be  resigned  to 
it.  Perhaps  this  point  is  no 
longer  a  question  with  you, 
and  my  pertinacious  dwelling 
upon  it  is  a  rude  intrusion  upon 


your  feelings.  If  so,  you  must 
pardon  me.  You  know  the 
hell  I  have  suffered  on  that 
point,  and  how  tender  I  am 
upon  it. 


Ill 

ADVICE    TO    YOUNG    LAWYERS 

Notes    for    a    law    lecture,    written    about 
July  i,  1850. 

I  am  not  an  accomplished  law- 
yer. I  find  quite  as  much 
material  for  a  lecture  in  those 
points  wherein  I  have  failed  as 
in  those  wherein  I  have  been 
moderately  successful. 

The  leading  rule  for  the  law- 
yer, as  for  the  man  of  every 
other  calling,  is  diligence. 
Leave  nothing  for  to-morrow 
which  can  be  done  to-day. 
Never  let  your  correspondence 
fall  behind.  Whatever  piece 
of  business  you  have  in  hand, 
before  stopping,  do  all  the  la- 
bor pertaining  to  it  which  can 
9 


then  be  done.  When  you 
bring  a  common-law  suit,  if 
you  have  the  facts  for  doing  so, 
write  the  declaration  at  once. 
If  a  law  point  be  involved, 
examine  the  books,  and  note 
the  authority  you  rely  on  upon 
the  declaration  itself,  where  you 
are  sure  to  find  it  when  wanted. 
The  same  of  defenses  and  pleas. 
In  business  not  likely  to  be  liti- 
gated,—ordinary  collection 
cases,  foreclosures,  partitions, 
and  the  like,  —  make  all  exam- 
inations of  titles,  and  note  them, 
and  even  draft  orders  and  de- 
crees in  advance.  This  course 
has  a  triple  advantage :  it 
avoids  omissions  and  neglect, 
saves  your  labor  when  once 
done,  performs  the  labor  out  of 
court  when  you  have  leisure, 
rather  than  in  court  when  you 
have  not. 

Extemporaneous     speaking 
should  be  practised  and  culti- 
10 


vated.  It  is  the  lawyer's  ave- 
nue to  the  public.  However 
able  and  faithful  he  may  be  in 
other  respects,  people  are  slow 
to  bring  him  business  if  he  can- 
not make  a  speech.  And  yet 
there  is  not  a  more  fatal  error 
to  young  lawyers  than  relying 
too  much  on  speech-making. 
If  any  one,  upon  his  rare  pow- 
ers of  speaking,  shall  claim  an 
exemption  from  the  drudgery 
of  the  law,  his  case  is  a  failure 
in  advance. 

Discourage  litigation.  Per- 
suade your  neighbors  to  com- 
promise •  whenever  you  can. 
Point  out  .to  them  hew  the 
nominal  winner  is  often  a  real 
loser — in  fees,  expenses,  and 
waste  of  time.  As  a  peace- 
maker the  lawyer  has  a  supe- 
rior opportunity  of  being  a 
good  man.  There  will  still  be 
business  enough. 

Never  stir  up  litigation.     A 

11 


worse  man  can  scarcely  be 
found  than  one  who  does  this. 
Who  can  be  more  nearly  a  fiend 
than  he  who  habitually  over- 
hauls the  register  of  deeds  in 
search  of  defects  in  titles, 
whereon  to  stir  up  strife,  and 
put  money  in  his  pocket?  A 
moral  tone  ought  to  be  infused 
into  the  profession  which 
should  drive  such  men  out  of 
it. 

The  matter  of  fees  is  impor- 
tant, far  beyond  the  mere  ques- 
tion of  bread  and  butter  in- 
volved. Properly  attended  to, 
fuller  justice  is  done  to  both 
lawyer  and  client.  An  exor- 
bitant fee  should  never  be 
claimed.  As  a  general  rule, 
never  take  your  whole  fee  in 
advance,  nor  any  more  than  a 
small  retainer.  When  fully 
paid  beforehand,  you  are  more 
than  a  common  mortal  if  you 
can  feel  the  same  interest  in 
12 


the  case  as  if  something  was 
still  in  prospect  for  you,  as  well 
as  for  your  client.  And  when 
you  lack  interest  in  the  case 
the  job  will  very  likely  lack 
skill  and  diligence  in  the  per- 
formance. Settle  the  amount 
of  fee  and  take  a  note  in  ad- 
vance. Then  you  will  feel  that 
you  are  working  for  something, 
and  you  are  sure  to  do  your 
work  faithfully  and  well. 
Never  sell  a  fee-note— at  least 
not  before  the  consideration 
service  is  performed.  It  leads 
to  negligence  and  dishonesty 
— negligence  by  losing  interest 
in  the  case,  and  dishonesty  in 
refusing  to  refund  when  you 
have  allowed  the  consideration 
to  fail. 

There  is  a  vague  popular 
belief  that  lawyers  are  neces- 
sarily dishonest.  I  say  vague, 
because  when  we  consider  to 
what    extent    confidence    and 


18 


honors  are  reposed  in  and  con- 
ferred upon  lawyers  by  the 
people,  it  appears  improbable 
that  their  impression  of  dis- 
honesty is  very  distinct  and 
vivid.  Yet  the  impression  is 
common,  almost  universal. 
Let  no  young  man  choosing 
the  law  for  a  calling  for  a  mo- 
ment yield  to  the  popular  be- 
lief. Resolve  to  be  honest  at 
all  events ;  and  if  in  your  own 
judgment  you  cannot  be  an 
honest  lawyer,  resolve  to  be 
honest  without  being  a  lawyer. 
Choose  some  other  occupation, 
rather  than  one  in  the  choos- 
ing of  which  you  do,  in  ad- 
vance, consent  to  be  a  knave. 


u 


IV 

SLAVERY 
A  fragment,  written  about  July  i,  1854. 

Equality  in  society  alike  beats 
inequality,  whether  the  latter 
be  of  the  British  aristocratic  sort 
or  of  the  domestic  slavery  sort. 
We  know  Southern  men 
declare  that  their  slaves  are 
better  off  than  hired  laborers 
amongst  us.  How  little  they 
know  whereof  they  speak! 
There  is  no  permanent  class  of 
hired  laborers  amongst  us. 
Twenty-five  years  ago  I  was  a 
hired  laborer.  The  hired  la- 
borer of  yesterday  labors  on  his 
own  account  to-day,  and  will 
hire  others  to  labor  for  him  to- 
morrow. 

15 


Advancement  —  improve- 
ment in  condition — is  the  order 
of  things  in  a  society  of  equals. 
As  labor  is  the  common  bur- 
den of  our  race,  so  the  effort 
of  some  to  shift  their  share  of 
the  burden  onto  the  shoulders 
of  others  is  the  great  durable 
curse  of  the  race.  Originally 
a  curse  for  transgression  upon 
the  whole  race,  when,  as  by 
slavery,  it  is  concentrated  on  a 
part  only,  it  becomes  the 
double-refined  curse  of  God 
upon  his  creatures. 

Free  labor  has  the  inspira- 
tion of  hope  ;  pure  slavery  has 
no  hope.  The  power  of  hope 
upon  human  exertion  and  hap- 
piness is  wonderful.  The 
slave-master  himself  has  a  con- 
ception of  it,  and  hence  the 
system  of  tasks  among  slaves. 
The  slave  whom  vou  cannot 
drive  with  the  lash  to  break 
seventy-five  pounds  of  hemp  in 

16 


a  day,  if  you  will  task  him  to 
break  a  hundred,  and  promise 
him  pay  for  all  he  does  over, 
he  will  break  you  a  hundred 
and  fifty.  You  have  substi- 
tuted hope  for  the  rod. 

And  yet  perhaps  it  does  not 
occur  to  you  that,  to  the  extent 
of  your  gain  in  the  case,  you 
have  given  up  the  slave  system 
and  adopted  the  free  system  of 
labor. 


iv 


SLAVERY 

A  fragment, of  the  same  date  as  the  preceding. 

If  A  can  prove,  however  con- 
clusively, that  he  may  of  right 
enslave  B,  why  may  not  B 
snatch  the  same  argument  and 
prove  equally  that  he  may  en- 
slave A?  You  say  A  is  white 
and  B  is  black.  It  is  color, 
then ;  the  lighter  having  the 
right  to  enslave  the  darker? 
Take  care.  By  this  rule  you 
are  to  be  slave  to  the  first  man 
you  meet  with  a  fairer  skin 
than  your  own. 

You  do  not  mean  color  ex- 
actly?    You  mean  the  whites 
are  intellectually  the  superiors 
of   the   blacks,   and    therefore 
is 


have  the  right  to  enslave  them? 
Take  care  again.  By  this  rule 
you  are  to  be  slave  to  the  first 
man  you  meet  with  an  intellect 
superior  to  your  own. 

But,  say  you,  it  is  a  question 
of  interest,  and  if  you  make  it 
your  interest  you  have  the  right 
to  enslave  another.  Very  well. 
And  if  he  can  make  it  his  in- 
terest he  has  the  right  to  en- 
slave you. 


19 


VI 

THE    REAL    SOUTHERN    VIEW 
OF    SLAVERY 

From  a  speech  delivered  at  Peoria,  Illinois, 
October  16,1854,  in  reply  to  Senator  Douglas. 

Equal  justice  to  the  South,  it 
is  said,  requires  us  to  consent 
to  the  extension  of  slavery  to 
new  countries.  That  is  to  say, 
inasmuch  as  you  do  not  object 
to  my  taking  my  hog  to  Ne- 
braska, therefore  I  must  not 
object  to  you  taking  your 
slave. 

Now,  I  admit  that  this  is 
perfectly  logical,  if  there  is  no 
difference  between  hogs  and 
negroes.  But  while  you  thus  re- 
quire me  to  deny  the  humanity 
of  the  negro,  I  wish  to  ask  whe- 

20 


ther  you  of  the  South  yourselves 
have  ever  been  willing  to  do  as 
much.     It  is  kindly  provided 
that  of  all  those  who  come  into 
the  world  only  a  small  percen- 
tage are  natural  tyrants.     That 
percentage  is  no  larger  in  the 
slave   States  than  in  the  free. 
The  great  majority   South,   as 
well    as    North,    have    human 
sympathies,  of  which  they  can 
no  more  divest  themselves  than 
they  can  of  their  sensibility  to 
physical  pain.     These  sympa- 
thies  in    the     bosoms   of    the 
Southern   people    manifest,  in 
many  ways,  their  sense  of  the 
wrong    of    slavery,    and    their 
consciousness    that,    after   all, 
there  is  humanity  in  the  negro. 
If  they  deny  this,  let  me  ad- 
dress them  a  few  plain  ques- 
tions.     In  1820  you  joined  the 
North,  almost  unanimously,  in 
declaring    the    African    slave- 
trade  piracy,  and  in  annexing 
21 


to  it  the  punishment  of  death. 
Why  did  you  do  this?      If  you 
did  not  feel  that  it  was  wrong, 
why  did  you  join  in  providing 
that  men  should  be  hung  for  it? 
The  practice  was  no  more  than 
bringing    wild    negroes     from 
Africa   to  such  as  would  buy 
them.      But  you  never  thought 
of  hanging  men  for  catching 
and   selling   wild   horses,  wild 
buffaloes,  or  wild  bears. 

Again,  you  have  among  you 
a   sneaking   individual   of   the 
class  of  native  tyrants  known 
as    the    "Slave-Dealer."     He 
watches  your  necessities,  and 
crawls  up  to  buy  your  slave  at 
a    speculating    price.      If  you 
cannot  help  it,  you  sell  to  him  ; 
but  if  you  can    help    it,   you 
drive    him    from    your    door. 
You  despise  him  utterly.     You 
do    not   recognize    him    as    a 
friend,  or   even    as   an   honest 
man.     Your  children  must  not 


22 


play  with  his  ;  they  may  rollick 
freely  with   the  little  negroes, 
but  not  with  the  slave-dealer's 
children.     If  you  are  obliged 
to  deal  with  him,  you  try  to 
get  through  the  job  without  so 
much  as  touching  him.      It  is 
common  with  you  to  join  hands 
with    the   men  you  meet,  but 
with  the  slave-dealer  you  avoid 
the    ceremony  —  instinctively 
shrinking  from  the  snaky  con-, 
tact.      If  he  grows  rich  and  re^ 
tires   from   business,   you    still 
remember  him,  and  still  keep 
up  the  ban  of  non-intercourse 
upon     him     and    his    family. 
Now    why    is    this?     You   do 
not  so  treat  the  man  who  deals 
in  corn,  cotton,  or  tobacco. 

And  yet  again.  There  are 
in  the  United  States  and  Ter- 
ritories, including  the  District 
of  Columbia,  433>643  free 
blacks.  At  five  hundred  dol- 
lars per  head  they  are  worth 

23 


over  two  hundred  millions  of 
dollars.  How  comes  this  vast 
amount  of  property  to  be  run. 
ning  about  without  owners? 
We  do  not  see  free  horses  or 
free  cattle  running  at  large. 
How  is  this?  All  these  free 
blacks  are  the  descendants  of 
slaves,  or  have  been  slaves 
themselves ;  and  they  would  be 
slaves  now  but  for  something 
which  has  operated  on  their 
white  owners,  inducing  them 
at  vast  pecuniary  sacrifice  to 
liberate  them.  What  is  that 
something?  Is  there  any  mis- 
taking it?  In  all  these  cases 
it  is  vour  sense  of  justice  and 
human  sympathy  continually 
telling  you  that  the  poor  negro 
has  some  natural  right  to  him- 
self— that  those  who  deny  it 
and  make  mere  merchandise 
of  him  deserve  kickings,  con- 
tempt, and  death. 

And  now  whv  will  you  ask  us 

24 


to  deny  the  humanity  of  the 
slave,  and  estimate  him  as  only 
the  equal  of  the  hog  ?  Why  ask 
us  to  do  what  you  will  not  do 
yourselves?  Why  ask  us  to  do 
for  nothing  what  two  hundred 
millions  of  dollars  could  not 
induce  you  to  do? 


25 


VII 

THE    RIGHT    OF    SELF- 
GOVERNMENT 

From  a  speech  delivered  at  Peoria,  Illinois, 
October  16, 1854,  in  reply  to  Senator  Douglas. 

But  one  great  argument  in 
support  of  the  repeal  of  the 
Missouri  Compromise  is  still  to 
come.  That  argument  is  "  the 
sacred  right  of  self-govern- 
ment." It  seems  our  distin- 
guished senator  has  found  great 
difficulty  in  getting  his  antag- 
onists, even  in  the  Senate,  to 
meet  him  fairly  on  this  argu- 
ment.     Some  poet  has  said  : 

Fools  rush  in  where  angels  fear  to 


tread. 


» 


At  the  hazard  of  being  thought 
one  of  the  fools  of  this  quota- 

2S 


tion,  I  meet  that  argument  — I 
rush  in— I  take  that  bull  by  the 
horns.  I  trust  I  understand 
and  truly  estimate  the  right  of 
self-government.  My  faith  in 
the  proposition  that  each  man 
should  do  precisely  as  he 
pleases  with  all  which  is  ex- 
clusively his  own  lies  at  the 
foundation  of  the  sense  of  jus- 
tice there  is  in  me. 

I  extend  the  principle  to 
communities  of  men  as  well  as 
to  individuals.  I  so  extend  it 
because  it  is  politically  wise  as 
well  as  naturally  just:  politi- 
cally wise  in  saving  us  from 
broils  about  matters  which  do 
not  concern  us.  Here,  or  at 
Washington,  I  would  not  trou- 
ble myself  with  the  oyster  laws 
of  Virginia,  or  the  cranberry 
laws  of  Indiana. 

The  doctrine  of  self-govern- 
ment is  right,— absolutely  and 
eternally  right,— but  it  has  no 

27 


just    application    as    here    at- 
tempted.    Or  perhaps  I  should 
rather  say  that  whether  it  has 
such  application  depends  upon 
whether  a  negro  is  not  or  is  a 
man.      If  he  is  not  a  man,  in 
that  case  he  who  is  a  man  may, 
as  a  matter  of  self-government, 
do  just  what  he  pleases  with 
him.     But  if    the    negro   is   a 
man,  is  it  not  to  that  extent  a 
total  destruction  of  self-govern- 
ment to  sav  that  he  too  shall 
not  govern  himself?    When  the 
white    man    governs    himself, 
that    is    self-government;    but 
when  he  governs  himself  and 
also  governs  another  man,  that 
is  more  than  self-government— 
that  is  despotism.     If  the  negro 
is  a  man,  why  then  my  ancient 
faith  teaches'me  that  "  all  men 
are   created   equal,"   and   that 
there  can  be  no  moral  right  in 
connection  with  one  man's  mak- 
ing a  slave  of  another. 


4& 

38 


Judge  Douglas  frequently, 
with  bitter  irony  and  sarcasm, 
paraphrases  our  argument  by 
saying  :  "  The  white  people  of 
Nebraska  are  good  enough  to 
govern  themselves,  but  they 
are  not  good  enough  to  govern 
a  few  miserable  negroes!'1 

Well!  I  doubt  not  that  the 
people  of  Nebraska  are  and 
will  continue  to  be  as  good  as 
the  average  of  people  else- 
where. I  do  not  say  the  con- 
trary. What  I  do  say  is  that 
no  man  is  good  enough  to  gov- 
ern another  man  without  that 
other's  consent.  I  say  this  is 
the  leading  principle,  the  sheet- 
anchor,  of  American  republi- 
canism. 


29 


VIII 

MEANING      OF      THE      DECLARA- 
TION   OF    INDEPENDENCE 

From  a  speech  delivered  at  Springfield,  Illi- 
nois, June  26,  1857. 

Chief  Justice  Taney,  in  his 
opinion  in  the  Dred  Scott  case, 
admits  that  the  language  of  the 
Declaration  is  broad  enough 
to  include  the  whole  human 
family,  but  he  and  Judge 
Douglas  argue  that  the  authors 
of  that  instrument  did  not 
intend  to  include  negroes,  by 
the  fact  that  they  did  not  at 
once  actually  place  them  on  an 
equality  with  the  whites. 

Now  this  grave  argument 
comes  to  just  nothing  at  all,  by 
the  other  fact  that  thev  did  not 


at  once,  or  ever  afterward,  actu- 
ally place  all  white  people  on 
an  equality  with  one  another. 
And  this  is  the  staple  argument 
of  both  the  chief  justice  and 
the  senator  for  doing  this  ob- 
vious violence  to  the  plain, 
unmistakable  language  of  the 
Declaration! 

I  think  the  authors  of  that 
notable  instrument  intended  to 
include  all  men,  but  they  did 
not  intend  to  declare  all  men 
equal  in  all  respects.     They  did 
not  mean  to  say  all  wTere  equal 
in  color,  size,  intellect,  moral 
developments,  or  social  capa- 
city.    They  denned  with  toler- 
able   distinctness  in   what  re- 
spects   they    did    consider    all 
men  created  equal  — equal  with 
"  certain     inalienable      rights, 
among  which  are  life,  liberty, 
and  the  pursuit  of  happiness." 
This  they  said,  and  this  they 
meant.     They  did  not  mean  to 

31 


assert  the  obvious  untruth  that 
all  were  then  actually  enjoying 
that  equality,  nor  yet  that  they 
were  about  to  confer  it  immedi- 
ately upon  them.  In  fact,  they 
had  no  power  to  confer  such  a 
boon.  Thev  meant  simply  to 
declare  the 'right,  so  that  en- 
forcement of  it  might  follow  as 
fast    as    circumstances  should 

permit. 

They  meant  to  set  up  a  stan- 
dard maxim   for  free  society, 
which  should  be  familiar  to  all, 
and  revered  by  all ;  constantly 
looked  to,  constantly   labored 
for,   and    even    though    never 
perfectlv    attained,    constantly 
approximated,     and     thereby 
constantly  spreading  and  deep- 
ening   its'  influence    and   aug- 
menting    the    happiness    and 
value  of  life  to  all  people  of  all 
colors  everywhere. 

The  assertion  that  "  all  men 
are  created  equal "  was  of  no 

32 


practical  use   in   effecting  our 
separation  from  Great  Britain  ; 
and  it  was  placed  in  the  Dec- 
laration not   for   that,  but   for 
future  use.     Its  authors  meant 
it  to  be— as,  thank  God.  it  is 
now    proving    itself— a   stum- 
bling-block to  all  those  who  in 
after  times  might  seek  to  turn 
a   free  people    back    into   the 
hateful    paths    of    despotism. 
They  knew    the   proneness  of 
prosperity  to  breed  tyrants,  and 
they  meant  when  such  should 
reappear  in  this  fair  land  and 
commence  their  vocation,  they 
should   find   left   for   them   at 
least  one  hard  nut  to  crack. 


93 


IX 


"  A     HOUSE     DIVIDED     AGAINST 
ITSELF    CANNOT   STAND  " 


From  a  speech  delivered  June  16,  1858,  at 
Springfield,  Illinois,  at  the  close  of  the  Re- 
publican State  Convention  by  which  Lincoln 
had  been  named  as  its  candidate  for  United 
States  senator. 

If  we  could  first  know  where 
we  are,  and  whither  we  are 
tending,  we  could  better  judge 
what  to  do,  and  how  to  do  it. 
We  are  now  far  into  the  fifth 
year  since  a  policy  was  initiated 
with  the  avowed  object  and 
confident  promise  of  putting  an 
end  to  slavery  agitation.  Un- 
der the  operation  of  that  pol- 
icy, that  agitation  has  not  only 
not  ceased,  but  has  constantly 
augmented.      In  my  opinion,  it 

34 


will  not  cease  until  a  crisis 
shall  have  been  reached  and 
passed.  "  A  house  divided 
against  itself  cannot  stand." 
I  believe  this  government  can- 
not endure  permanently  half 
slave  and  half  free. 

I  do  not  expect  the  Union 
to  be  dissolved — I  do  not  ex- 
pect the  house  to  fall — but  I 
do  expect  it  will  cease  to  be 
divided.  It  will  become  all 
one  thing,  or  all  the  other. 
Either  the  opponents  of  slav- 
•  ery  will  arrest  the  further  spread 
of  it,  and  place  it  where  the 
public  mind  shall  rest  in  the 
belief  that  it  is  in  the  course  of 
ultimate  extinction ;  or  its  ad- 
vocates will  push  it  forward  till 
it  shall  become  alike  lawful  in 
all  the  States,  old  as  well  as 
new,  North  as  well  as  South. 


RESISTANCE    TO    THE   SUPREME 
COURT 

From  a  speech   delivered    at  Chicago,  Illi- 
nois, July  10,  1858. 

I  have  expressed  heretofore, 
and  I  now  repeat,  my  opposi- 
tion to  the  Dred  Scott  deci- 
sion ;  but  I  should  be  allowed 
to  state  the  nature  of  that  op- 
position, and  I  ask  your  indul- 
gence while  I  do  so. 

What  is  fairly  implied  by 
the  term  Judge  Douglas  has 
used,  "  resistance  to  the  deci- 
sion"? I  do  not  resist  it.  If 
I  wanted  to  take  Dred  Scott 
from  his  master,  I  would  be 
interfering  with  property,  and 
that     terrible     difficulty     that 

33 


Judge  Douglas  speaks  of,  of 
interfering  with  property,  would 
arise.  But  I  am  doing  no  such 
thing  as  that;  all  that  I  am 
doing  is  refusing  to  obey  it  as 
a  political  rule.  If  I  were  in 
Congress,  and  a  vote  should 
come  up  on  a  question  whe- 
ther slavery  should  be  pro- 
hibited in  a  new  Territory,  in 
spite  of  the  Dred  Scott  deci- 
sion, I  would  vote  that  it 
should. 

That  is   what    I   would  do. 
Judge  Douglas  said  last  night 
that  before    the    decision    he 
might  advance  his  opinion,  and 
it  might  be  contrary  to  the  de- 
cision when  it  was  made  ;   but 
after  it   was   made    he   would 
abide    by    it   until    it   was  re- 
versed. '  Just  so!      We  let  this 
property  abide  by  the  decision, 
but  we  will  try  to  reverse  that 
decision.     We  will  try  to  put  it 
where    Judge    Douglas   would 


37 


not  object,  for  he  says  he  will 
obey  it  until  it  is  reversed. 
Somebody  has  to  reverse  that 
decision,  since  it  is  made ;  and 
we  mean  to  reverse  it,  and  we 
mean  to  do  it  peaceably. 

What  are  the  uses  of  deci- 
sions of  courts?  They  have 
two  uses.  As  rules  of  prop- 
erty they  have  two  uses.  First 
—  they  decide  upon  the  ques- 
tion before  the  court.  They 
decide  in  this  case  that  Dred 
Scott  is  a  slave.  Nobody 
resists  that.  Not  only  that, 
but  they  say  to  everybody  else 
that  persons  standing  just  as 
Dred  Scott  stands  are  as  he  is. 
That  is,  they  say  that  when  a 
question  comes  up  upon  an- 
other person,  it  will  be  so  de- 
cided again,  unless  the  court 
decides  in  another  way,  unless 
the  court  overrules  its  decision. 
Well,  we  mean  to  do  what  we 
can  to  have  the  court  decide 

38 


the   other  way.     That  is   one 
thing  we  mean  to  try  to  do. 

The  sacredness  that  Judge 
Douglas    throws    around    this 
decision  is  a  degree  of  sacred- 
ness that  has  never  been  before 
thrown  around   any  other  de- 
cision.    I  have  never  heard  of 
such  a  thing.     Why,  decisions 
apparently  contrary  to  that  de- 
cision, or  that    good   lawyers 
thought  were  contrary  to  that 
decision,  have  been   made  by 
that   very  court  before.     It  is 
the   first' of   its  kind;   it  is  an 
astonisher  in  legal  history.      It 
is  a  new  wonder  of  the  world. 
It  is  based  upon  falsehood  in 
the  main  as  to  the  facts— alle- 
gations of  facts  upon  which  it 
stands  are  not  facts  at  all  in 
many  instances ;  and  no  deci- 
sion made  on  any  question  — 
the  first  instance  of  a  decision 
made   under  so   many  unfav- 
orable    circumstances  —  thus 


39 


placed  has  ever  been  held  by 
the  profession  as  law,  and  it 
has  always  needed  confirmation 
before  the  lawyers  regarded  it 
as  settled  law. 

But  Judge  Douglas  will  have 
it  that  all  hands  must  take  this 
extraordinary    decision,   made 
under  these  extraordinary  cir- 
cumstances, and  give  their  vote 
in  Congress  in  accordance  with 
it,  yield  to   it  and  obey  it  in 
every  possible  sense.     Circum- 
stances alter  cases.   Do  not  gen- 
tlemen here  remember  the  case 
of  that  same  Supreme  Court, 
some  twenty- five  or  thirty  years 
ago,  deciding  that   a  national 
bank    was    constitutional?      I 
ask  if  somebody  does  not  re- 
member that  a  national  bank 
was  declared   to  be   constitu- 
tional?      Such     is    the    truth, 
whether  it  be  remembered  or 
not.      The  bank   charter   ran 
out,     and     a     recharter    was 


40 


granted    by    Congress.      That 
recharter  was  laid  before  Gen- 
eral  Jackson.      It    was    urged 
upon  him,  when  he  denied  the 
constitutionality   of  the   bank, 
that   the   Supreme   Court  had 
decided  that  it   was   constitu- 
tional;   and    General   Jackson 
then    said   that    the     Supreme 
Court  had  no  right  to  lay  down 
a  rule  to  govern  a  coordinate 
branch  of  the  government,  the 
members  of  which  had  sworn  to 
support  the  Constitution— that 
each  member  had  sworn  to  sup- 
port  that    Constitution   as    he 
understood  it.     I  will  venture 
here  to  say  that  I  have  heard 
Judge  Douglas  say  that  he  ap- 
proved of  General  Jackson  for 
that  act.     What   has  now  be- 
come of  all  his  tirade  against 
"resistance    to    the    Supreme 
Court"? 


41 


XI 

REPEAL    OF    THE    MISSOURI 
COMPROMISE 

From  Lincoln's  reply  to  Douglas  in  the 
joint  debate  at  Jonesboro,  Illinois,  Septem- 
ber 15,  1858. 

The  judge  has  gone  over  a 
long  account  of  the  Old  Whig 
and  Democratic  parties,  and  it 
connects  itself  with  this  charge 
against  Trumbull  and  myself. 

He  says  that  they  agreed 
upon  a  compromise  in  regard 
to  the  slavery  question  in  1850  ; 
that  in  a  national  Democratic 
convention  resolutions  were 
passed  to  abide  by  that  com- 
promise as  a  finality  upon  the 
slavery  question.  He  also  says 
that  the  Whig  party  in  national 
convention  agreed  to  abide  by 

42 


and  regard  as  a  finality  the 
compromise  of  1850.  I  un- 
derstand the  judge  to  be  alto- 
gether right  about  that ;  I  un- 
derstand that  part  of  the  history 
of  the  country  as  stated  by  him 
to  be  correct.  I  recollect  that 
I,  as  a  member  of  that  party, 
acquiesced  in  that  compromise. 
I  recollect  in  the  Presidential 
election  which  followed,  when 
we  had  General  Scott  up  for 
the  Presidency,  Judge  Douglas 
was  around  berating  us  Whigs 
as  abolitionists,  precisely  as  he 
does  to-day — not  a  bit  of  dif- 
ference. I  have  often  heard 
him.  We  could  do  nothing 
when  the  Old  Whig  party  was 
alive  that  was  not  abolitionism, 
but  it  has  got  an  extremely  good 
name  since  it  has  passed  away. 
When  that  compromise  was 
made,  it  did  not  repeal  the  old 
Missouri  Compromise.  It  left 
a  region  of  United  States  ter- 

43 


ritory  half  as  large  as  the  pres- 
ent territory  of  the  United 
States,  north  of  the  line  of  360 
30',  in  which  slavery  was  pro- 
hibited by  act  of  Congress. 
This  compromise  did  not  re- 
peal that  one.  It  did  not 
affect  or  propose  to  repeal  it. 
But  at  last  it  became  Judge 
Douglas's  duty,  as  he  thought 
(and  I  find  no  fault  with  him), 
as  chairman  of  the  Committee 
on  Territories,  to  bring  in  a 
bill  for  the  organization  of  a 
territorial  government — first  of 
one,  then  of  two  Territories 
north  of  that  line.  When  he 
did  so  it  ended  in  his  inserting 
a  provision  substantially  repeal- 
ing the  Missouri  Compromise. 
That  was  because  the  com- 
promise of  1850  had  not 
repealed  it. 

And  now  I  ask  why  he  could 
not  have  left  that  compromise 
alone.       We   were  quiet   from 
44 


the    agitation    of    the    slavery 
question.       We    were    making 
no  fuss  about  it.     All  had  ac- 
quiesced   in    the    compromise 
measures  of  1850.      We  never 
had    been   seriously    disturbed 
by  any  abolition  agitation  be- 
fore   that    period.      When    he 
came  to  form  governments  for 
the  Territories  north  of  the  line 
of  360  30',  why  could  he  not 
have  let  that  matter  stand  as  it 
was  standing?      Was  it  neces- 
sary  to  the  organization  of  a 
Territory?     Not  at  all.     Iowa 
lay  north  of  the  line,  and  had 
been  organized  as  a  Territory, 
and  came  into  the  Union  as  a 
State   without    disturbing   that 
compromise.       There   was   no 
sort  of  necessity  for  destroying 
it  to  organize  these  Territories. 
But,  gentlemen,  it  would  take 
up  all  my  time  to  meet  all  the 
little   quibbling   arguments    of 
Judge   Douglas   to  show   that 
45 


the  Missouri  Compromise  was 
repealed  by  the  compromise  of. 
1850.  My  own  opinion  is  that 
a  careful  investigation  of  all 
the  arguments  to  sustain  the 
position  that  that  compromise 
was  virtually  repealed  by  the 
compromise  of  1850  would 
show  that  they  are  the  merest 
fallacies.  I  have  the  report 
that  Judge  Douglas  first 
brought  into  Congress  at  the 
time  of  the  introduction  of  the 
Nebraska  Bill,  which  in  its 
original  form  did  not  repeal 
the  Missouri  Compromise,  and 
he  there  expressly  stated  that 
he  had  forborne  to  do  so  be- 
cause it  had  not  been  done  by 
the  compromise  of  1850. 

I  close  this  part  of  the  dis- 
cussion on  my  part  by  asking 
him  the  question  again,  "  Why, 
when  we  had  peace  under  the 
Missouri  Compromise,  could 
you  not  have  let  it  alone?  " 

46 


XII 

NOTES    FOR    SPEECHES 
Written  about  October  i,  1858. 

Suppose  it  is  true  that  the 
negro  is  inferior  to  the  white  in 
the  gifts  of  nature ;  is  it  not 
the  exact  reverse  of  justice  that 
the  white  should  for  that  rea- 
son take  from  the  negro  any 
part  of  the  little  which  he  has 
had  given  him?  "  Give  to  him 
that  is  needy  "  is  the  Christian 
rule  of  charity;  but  "Take 
from  him  that  is  needy  "  is  the 
rule  of  slavery. 

The  sum  of  pro-slavery  theol- 
ogy seems  to  be  this :  "  Slav- 
ery is  not  universally  right,  nor 
yet  universally  wrong  ;  it  is  bet- 

47 


ter  for  some  people  to  be 
slaves ;  and,  in  such  cases,  it  is 
the  will  of  God  that  they  be 

such." 

Certainly   there   is  no   con- 
tending against  the  will  of  God  ; 
but  still  there  is  some  difficulty 
in  ascertaining  and  applying  it 
to    particular   cases.      For    in- 
stance,   we    will    suppose    the 
Rev.    Dr.    Ross    has    a    slave 
named   Sambo,  and   the  ques- 
tion is,  "  Is  it  the  will  of  God 
that  Sambo  shall  remain  a  slave, 
or    be    set    free?"     The    Al- 
mighty gives  no  audible  answer 
to  the  question,  and  his  revela- 
tion, the  Bible,  gives  none— or 
at  most  none  but  such  as  ad- 
mits   of   a   squabble   as  to  its 
meaning  ;  no  one  thinks  of  ask- 
ing Sambo's  opinion  on  it.     So 
at  last  it  comes  to  this,  that  Dr. 
Ross  is  to  decide  the  question  ; 
and  while  he  considers  it,  he 
sits  in  the  shade,  with  gloves  on 


48 


his  hands,  and  subsists  on  the 
bread  that  Sambo  is  earning  in 
the  burning  sun.  If  he  decides 
that  God  wills  Sambo  to  con- 
tinue a  slave,  he  thereby  retains 
his  own  comfortable  position  ; 
but  if  he  decides  that  God  wills 
Sambo  to  be  free,  he  thereby 
has  to  walk  out  of  the  shade, 
throw  off  his  gloves,  and  delve 
for  his  own  bread.  Will  Dr. 
Ross  be  actuated  by  the  perfect 
impartiality  which  has  ever 
been  considered  most  favorable 
to  correct  decisions? 


43 


XIII 

THE   NEGRO    INCLUDED   IN    THE 
DECLARATION    OF    IN- 
DEPENDENCE 

From    Lincoln's    reply    to    Douglas    in    the 
Galesburg  joint  debate,  October  7,  1858. 

The  judge  has  alluded  to  the 
Declaration  of  Independence, 
and  insisted  that  negroes  are 
not  included  in  that  Declara- 
tion, and  that  it  is  a  slander 
upon  the  framers  of  that  instru- 
ment to  suppose  that  negroes 
were  meant  therein ;  and  he 
asks  you :  Is  it  possible  to  be- 
lieve that  Mr.  Jefferson,  who 
penned  the  immortal  paper, 
could  have  supposed  himself 
applying  the  language  of  that 
instrument  to   the  negro  race, 

50 


and  yet  held  a  portion  of  that 
race  in  slavery?  Would  he 
not  at  once  have  freed  them? 
I  only  .have  to  remark  upon 
this  part  of  the  judge's  speech 
(and  that,  too,  very  briefly,  for 
I  shall  not  detain  myself,  or 
you,  upon  that  point  for  any 
great  length  of  time),  that  I  be- 
lieve the  entire  records  of  the 
world,  from  the  date  of  the 
Declaration  of  Independence 
up  to  within  three  years  ago, 
may  be  searched  in  vain  for 
one  single  affirmation,  from  one 
single  man,  that  the  negro  was 
not  included  in  the  Declaration 
of  Independence.  I  think  I 
may  defy  Judge  Douglas  to 
show  that  he  ever  said  so,  that 
Washington  ever  said  so,  that 
any  President  ever  said  so,  that 
any  member  of  Congress  ever 
said  so,  or  that  any  living  man 
upon  the  whole  earth  ever  said 
so,  until  the  necessities  of  the 

51 


present  policy  of  the  Demo- 
cratic party,  in  regard  to  slav- 
ery, had  to  invent  that  affirma- 
tion. 

And  I  will  remind  Judge 
Douglas  and  this  audience  that 
while  Mr.  Jefferson  was  the 
owner  of  slaves,  as  undoubtedly 
he  was,  in  speaking  upon  this 
very  subject,  he  used  the  strong 
language  that  "  he  trembled  for 
his  country  when  he  remem- 
bered that  God  was  just "  ;  and 
I  will  offer  the  highest  premium 
in  my  power  to  Judge  Douglas 
if  he  will  show  that  he,  in  all 
his  life,  ever  uttered  a  sentiment 
at  all  akin  to  that  of  Jefferson. 


52 


XIV 

THE    DRED    SCOTT    DECISION 

From    Lincoln's   reply   to   Douglas    in    the 
Galesburg  joint  debate,  October  7,  1858. 

The  essence  of  the  Dred  Scott 
case  is  compressed  into  the 
sentence  which  I  will  now  read  : 
"  Now,  as  we  have  already  said 
in  an  earlier  part  of  this  opin- 
ion,upon  a  different  point,  the 
right  of  property  in  a  slave  is 
distinctly  and  expressly  affirmed 
in  the  Constitution."  I  repeat 
it,  "the  right  of  property  in  a 
slave  is  distinctly  and  expressly 
affirmed  in  the  Constitution"! 
What  is  it  to  be  "  affirmed  "  in 
the  Constitution?  Made  firm 
in  the  Constitution — so  made 
that  it  cannot  be  separated 
from  the  Constitution  without 

53 


breaking  the  Constitution — 
durable  as  the  Constitution, 
and  part  of  the  Constitution? 
Now,  remembering  the  provi- 
sion of  the  Constitution  which 
I  have  read,  affirming  that  that 
instrument  is  the  supreme  law 
of  the  land  ;  that  the  judges  of 
every  State  shall  be  bound  by 
it,  any  law  or  constitution  of 
any  State  to  the  contrary  not- 
withstanding ;  that  the  right  of 
property  in  a  slave  is  affirmed 
in  that  Constitution,  is  made, 
formed  into,  and  cannot  be 
separated  from  it  without 
breaking  it — durable  as  the  in- 
strument, part  of  the  instru- 
ment,—  what  follows  as  a  short 
and  even  syllogistic  argument 
from  it?  I  think  it  follows — 
and  I  submit  to  the  considera- 
tion of  men  capable  of  arguing, 
whether  as  I  state  it,  in  syllo- 
gistic form,  the  argument  has 
any  fault  in  it: 

54 


Nothing  in  the  constitution 
or  laws  of  any  State  can  de- 
stroy a  right  distinctly  and  ex- 
pressly affirmed  in  the  Consti- 
tution of  the  United  States. 

The  right  of  property  in  a 
slave  is  distinctly  and  expressly 
affirmed  in  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States. 

Therefore  nothing  in  the 
constitution  or  laws  of  any 
State  can  destroy  the  right  of 
property  in  a  slave. 

1  believe  that  no  fault  can  be 
pointed  out  in  that  argument ; 
assuming  the  truth  of  the  prem- 
ises, the  conclusion,  so  far  as  I 
have  capacity  at  all  to  under- 
stand it,  follows  inevitablv. 
There  is  a  fault  in  it,  as  I  think, 
but  the  fault  is  not  in  the  rea- 
soning ;  the  falsehood,  in  fact, 
is  a  fault  in  the  premises.  I 
believe  that  the  right  of  prop- 
erty in  a  slave  is  not  distinctly 
and  expressly  affirmed  in  the 

55 


Constitution,  and  Judge  Doug- 
las  thinks  it  is.      I  believe  that 
the    Supreme    Court    and   the 
advocates  of  that  decision  may 
search  in  vain  for  the  place  in 
the  Constitution  where  the  right 
of  property  in   a  slave  is  dis- 
tinctly and   expressly  affirmed. 
I  say,  therefore,  that  I  think 
one  of  the  premises  is  not  true 
in   fact.      But    it   is  true   with 
Judge  Douglas.     It  is  true  with 
the   Supreme    Court  who  pro- 
nounced it.    They  are  estopped 
from  denying  it,  and  being  es- 
topped from  denying  it,  the  con- 
clusion follows  that,  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States 
being  the  supreme  law,  no  con- 
stitution  or  law    can   interfere 
with  it.      It   being  affirmed  in 
the  decision   that  the  right  of 
property  in  a  slave  is  distinctly 
and   expressly  affirmed   in  the 
Constitution,  the  conclusion  in- 
evitably follows  that  no  State 

56 


law  or  constitution  can  destroy 
that  right.  I  then  say  to  Judge 
Douglas,  and  to  all  others,  that 
I  think  it  will  take  a  better  an- 
swer than  a  sneer  to  show  that 
those  who  have  said  that  the 
right  of  property  in  a  slave  is 
distinctly  and  expressly  affirmed 
in  the  Constitution  are  not  pre- 
pared to  show  that  no  constitu- 
tion or  law  can  destroy  that 
right.  I  say  I  believe  it  will 
take  a  far  better  argument  than 
a  mere  sneer  to  show  to  the 
minds  of  intelligent  men  that 
whoever  has  so  said  is  not  pre- 
pared, whenever  public  senti- 
ment is  so  far  advanced  as  to 
justify  it,  to  say  the  other. 


67 


XV 

THE    WRONG    OF    SLAVERY 

From  Lincoln's  opening  speech  in  the  de- 
bate with  Douglas  at  Quincy,  Illinois,  Oc- 
tober 13,  1858. 

We  have  in  this  nation  the  ele- 
ment of  domestic  slavery.  It 
is  a  matter  of  absolute  certainty 
that  it  is  a  disturbing  element. 
It  is  the  opinion  of  all  the  great 
men  who  have  expressed  an 
opinion  upon  it,  that  it  is  a  dan- 
gerous element.  We  keep  up 
a  controversy  in  regard  to  it. 
That  controversy  necessarily 
springs  from  difference  of  opin- 
ion, and  if  we  can  learn  exactly 
— can  reduce  to  the  lowest  ele- 
ments— what  that  difference  of 
opinion  is,  we  perhaps  shall  be 
better  prepared  for  discussing 

58 


the  different  systems  of  policy 
that  we  would  propose  in  re- 
gard to  that  disturbing  element. 

I  suggest  that  the  difference 
of  opinion,  reduced  to  its  low- 
est terms,  is  no  other  than  the 
difference  between  the  men 
who  think  slavery  a  wrong  and 
those  who  do  not  think  it 
wrong.  The  Republican  party 
think  it  wrong — we  think  it  is  a 
moral,  a  social,  and  a  political 
wrong.  We  think  it  is  a  wrong 
not  confining  itself  merely  to 
the  persons  or  the  States  where 
it  exists,  but  that  it  is  a  wrong 
which  in  its  tendency,  to  say 
the  least,  affects  the  existence 
of  the  whole  nation.  Because 
we  think  it  wrong,  we  propose 
a  course  of  policy  that  shall 
deal  with  it  as  a  wrong. 

We  deal  with  it  as  with  any 
other  wrong,  in  so  far  as  we 
can  prevent  its  growing  any 
larger,  and  so  deal  with  it  that 

53 


in  the  run  of  time  there  may  be 
some  promise  of  an  end  to  it. 
We  have  a  due  regard  to  the 
actual  presence  of  it  amongst 
us,  and  the  difficulties  of  get- 
ting rid  of  it  in  any  satisfactory 
way,  and  all  the  constitutional 
obligations  thrown  about  it.  I 
suppose  that  in  reference  both 
to  its  actual  existence  in  the 
nation,  and  to  our  constitu- 
tional obligations,  we  have  no 
right  at  all  to  disturb  it  in  the 
States  where  it  exists,  and  we 
profess  that  we  have  no  more 
inclination  to  disturb  it  than  we 
have  the  right  to  do  it.  We  go 
further  than  that :  we  don't  pro- 
pose to  disturb  it  where,  in  one 
instance,  we  think  the  Constitu- 
tion would  permit  us.  We  think 
the  Constitution  would  permit 
us  to  disturb  it  in  the  District  of 
Columbia.  Still  we  do  not  pro- 
pose to  do  that,  unless  it  should 
be  in  terms  which  I  don't  sup- 

60 


pose  the  nation  is  very  likely 
soon  to  agree  to — the  terms  of 
making  the  emancipation  grad- 
ual and  compensating  the  un- 
willing owners.  Where  we 
suppose  we  have  the  constitu- 
tional right,  we  restrain  our- 
selves in  reference  to  the  actual 
existence  of  the  institution  and 
the  difficulties  thrown  about  it. 
We  also  oppose  it  as  an  evil  so 
far  as  it  seeks  to  spread  itself. 
We  insist  on  the  policy  that 
shall  restrict  it  to  its  present 
limits.  We  don't  suppose  that 
in  doing  this  we  violate  any- 
thing due  to  the  actual  presence 
of  the  institution,  or  anything 
due  to  the  constitutional  guar- 
anties thrown  around  it. 

We  oppose  the  Dred  Scott 
decision  in  a  certain  way,  upon 
which  I  ought  perhaps  to  ad- 
dress you  in  a  few  words. 
We  do  not  propose  that  when 
Dred  Scott  has  been  decided  to 

61 


be  a  slave  by  the  court,  we,  as 
a  mob,  will  decide  him  to  be 
free.  We  do  not  propose  that, 
when  any  other  one,  or  one 
thousand,  shall  be  decided  by 
that  court  to  be  slaves,  we  will 
in  any  violent  way  disturb  the 
rights  of  property  thus  settled  ; 
but  we  nevertheless  do  oppose 
that  decision  as  a  political  rule, 
which  shall  be  binding  on  the 
voter  to  vote  for  nobody  who 
thinks  it  wrong,  which  shall  be 
binding  on  the  members  of 
Congress  or  the  President  to 
favor  no  measure  that  does  not 
actually  concur  with  the  prin- 
ciples of  that  decision.  We  do 
not  propose  to  be  bound  by  it 
as  a  political  rule  in  that  way, 
because    we   think  it  lavs  the 

J 

foundation  not  merelv  of  en- 
larging and  spreading  o\it  what 
we  consider  an  evil,  but  it  lays 
the  foundation  for  spreading 
that  evil  into  the  States  them- 

62 


selves.  We  propose  so  resist- 
ing it  as  to  have  it  reversed  if 
we  can,  and  a  new  judicial  rule 
established  upon  this  subject. 
I  will  add  this,  that  if  there 
be  anv  man  who  does  not  be- 
lieve  that  slavery  is  wrong  in 
the  three  aspects  which  I  have 
mentioned,  or  in  any  one  of 
them,  that  man  is  misplaced 
and  ought  to  leave  us.  While, 
on  the  other  hand,  if  there  be 
any  man  in  the  Republican 
party  who  is  impatient  over  the 
necessity  springing  from  its 
actual  presence,  and  is  impa- 
tient of  the  constitutional  guar- 
anties thrown  around  it,  and 
would  act  in  disregard  of  these, 
he  too  is  misplaced,  standing 
with  us.  He  will  find  his  place 
somewhere  else  ,  for  we  have  a 
due  regard,  so  far  as  we  are 
capable  of  understanding  them, 
for  all  these  things.  This,  gen- 
tlemen, as  well  as  I  can  give  it, 

63 


is  a  plain  statement  of  our  prin- 
ciples in  all  their  enormity. 

I  will  sav  now  that  there  is 
a  sentiment  in  the  country  con- 
trary  to  me — a  sentiment  which 
holds  that  slavery  is  not  wrong, 
and  therefore  goes  for  the  pol- 
icy that  does  not  propose  deal- 
ing with  it  as  a  wrong.  That 
policy  is  the  Democratic  pol- 
icy, and  that  sentiment  is  the 
Democratic  sentiment.  If 
there  be  a  doubt  in  the  mind 
of  any  one  of  this  vast  audi- 
ence that  this  is  really  the  cen- 
tral idea  of  the  Democratic 
party,  in  relation  to  this  sub- 
ject, I  ask  him  to  bear  with  me 
while  I  state  a  few  things  tend- 
ing, as  I  think,  to  prove  that 
proposition. 

In  the  first  place,  the  lead- 
ing man, —  I  think  I  may  do  my 
friend  Judge  Douglas  the  honor 
of  calling  him  such, —  advo- 
cating the  present  Democratic 

64 


policy,  never  himself  says  it  is 
wrong.  He  has  the  high  dis- 
tinction, so  far  as  I  know,  of 
never  having  said  slavery  is 
either  right  or  wrong.  Almost 
everybody  else  says  one  or  the 
other,  but  the  Judge  never  does. 
If  there  be  a  man  in  the  Demo- 
cratic party  who  thinks  it  is 
wrong,  and  yet  clings  to  that 
party,  I  suggest  to  him  in  the 
first  place  that  his  leader  don't 
talk  as  he  does,  for  he  never 
says  that  it  is  wrong. 

In  the  second  place,  I  sug- 
gest to  him  that  if  he  will  ex- 
amine the  policy  proposed  to 
be  carried  forward,  he  will  find 
that  he  carefully  excludes  the 
idea  that  there  is  anything 
wrong  in  it.  If  you  will  ex- 
amine the  arguments  that  are- 
made  on  it,  you  will  find  that 
every  one  carefully  excludes 
the  idea  that  there  is  anything 
wrong  in  slavery. 

6  6b 


Perhaps  that  Democrat  who 
says  he  is  as  much  opposed  to 
slavery  as  I  am  will  tell  me 
that  I  am  wrong  about  this. 
I  wish  him  to  examine  his  own 
course  in  regard  to  this  matter 
a  moment,  and  then  see  if  his 
opinion  will  not  be  changed  a 
little.  You  say  it  is  wrong; 
but  don't  you  constantly  object 
to  anybody  else  saying  so?  Do 
you  not  constantly  argue  that 
this  is  not  the  right  place  to  op- 
pose it  ?  You  say  it  must  not  be 
opposed  in  the  free  States,  be- 
cause slavery  is  not  there ;  it 
must  not  be  opposed  in  the  slave 
States,  because  it  is  there ;  it 
must  not  be  opposed  in  politics, 
because  that  will  make  a  fuss ; 
it  must  not  be  opposed  in  the 
pulpit,  because  it  is  not  re- 
ligion. Then  where  is  the 
place  to  oppose  it?  There  is 
no  suitable  place  to  oppose  it. 
There  is  no  plan  in  the  country 

66 


to  oppose  this  evil  overspread- 
ing the  continent,  which  you 
say  yourself  is  coming.  Frank 
Blair  and  Gratz  Brown  tried  to 
get  up  a  system  of  gradual 
emancipation  in  Missouri,  had 
an  election  in  August,  and  got 
beat ;  and  you,  Mr.  Democrat, 
threw  up  your  hat  and  hal- 
looed, "  Hurrah  for  Democ- 
racy! " 

So  I  say  again,  that  in  re- 
gard to  the  arguments  that  are 
made,  when  Judge  Douglas 
says  he  "don't  care  whether 
slavery  is  voted  up  or  voted 
down,"  whether  he  means  that 
as  an  individual  expression  of 
sentiment,  or  only  as  a  sort  of 
statement  of  his  views  on  na- 
tional policy,  it  is  alike  true  to 
say  that  he  can  thus  argue 
logically  if  he  don't  see  any- 
thing wrong  in  it ;  but  he  can- 
not say  so  logically  if  he  ad- 
mits  that    slavery    is     wrong. 

87 


He  cannot  say  that  he  would 
as  soon  see  a  wrong  voted  up 
as  voted  down.  When  Judge 
Douglas  says  that  whoever  or 
whatever  community  wants 
slaves,  they  have  a  right  to  have 
them,  he  is  perfectly  logical  if 
there  is  nothing  wrong  in  the 
institution ;  but  if  you  admit 
that  it  is  wrong,  he  cannot 
logically  say  that  anybody  has 
a  right  to  do  wrong.  When 
he  says  that  slave  property  and 
horse  and  hog  propertv  are 
alike  to  be  allowed  to  go  into 
the  Territories,  upon  the  prin- 
ciples of  equality,  he  is  reason- 
ing truly  if  there  is  no  differ- 
ence between  them  as  property  ; 
but  if  the  one  is  property, 
held  rightfully,  and  the  other 
is  wrong,  then  there  is  no 
equality  between  the  right  and 
wrong ;  so  that,  turn  it  in  any 
way  you  can,  in  all  the  argu- 
ments   sustaining    the    Derao- 

88 


cratic  policy,  and  in  that  policy 
itself,  there  is  a  careful,  studied 
exclusion  of  the  idea  that  there 
is  anything  wrong  in  slavery. 

Let  us  understand  this.  I 
am  not,  just  here,  trying  to 
prove  that  we  are  right  and 
they  are  wrong.  I  have  been 
stating  where  we  and  thev 
stand,  and  trying  to  show  what 
is  the  real  difference  between 
us ;  and  I  now  say  that  when- 
ever we  can  get  the  question 
distinctly  stated,  —  can  get  all 
these  men  who  believe  that 
slavery  is  in  some  of  these  re- 
spects wrong,  to  stand  and  act 
with  us  in  treating  it  as  a 
wrong,  —  then,  and  not  till  then, 
I  think,  will  we  in  some  way 

7  J 

come  to  an  end  of  this  slavery 
agitation. 


69 


XVI 

THE    PRINCIPLES    OF 
JEFFERSON 

From  a  letter   to   H.  L.  Pierce  and  others, 
dated  April  6,  1859. 

I  remember  being  once  much 
amused  at  seeing  two  partially 
intoxicated  men  engaged  in  a 
fight  with  their  greatcoats  on, 
which  fight,  after  a  long  and 
rather  harmless  contest,  ended 
in  each  having  fought  himself 
out  of  his  own  coat  and  into 
that  of  the  other.  If  the  two 
leading  parties  of  this  day  are 
really  identical  with  the  two  in 
the  days  of  Jefferson  and 
Adams,  they  have  performed 
the  same  feat  as  the  two 
drunken  men. 

70 


But,   soberly,  it  is   now   no 
child's  play  to  save  the  prin- 
ciples of  Jefferson   from  total 
overthrow  in  this  nation.     One 
would   state  with  great  confi- 
dence that  he  could  convince 
any  sane  child  that  the  simpler 
propositions  of  Euclid  are  true  ; 
but  nevertheless  he  would  fail 
utterly   with   one  who   should 
deny  the  definitions   and  axi- 
oms. 

The  principles  of  Jefferson 
are  the  definitions  and  axioms 
of  free  society.     And  yet  they 
are  denied   and   evaded,  with 
no  small  show  of  success.  One 
dashingly  calls  them   "glitter- 
ing     generalities."       Another 
bluntly    calls    them    "self-evi- 
dent lies."     And  others  insidi- 
ously argue  that  they  apply  to 
"  superior  races."       These  ex- 
pressions, differing  in  form,  are 
identical  in  object  and  effect— 
the  supplanting  the  principles 

71 


of  free  government,  and  restor- 
ing those  of  classification,  caste, 
and  legitimacy.     They   would 
delight      a      convocation      of 
crowned  heads  plotting  against 
the  people.      They  are  the  van- 
guard, the  miners  and  sappers, 
of   returning    despotism.     We 
must  repulse  them,  or  they  will 
subjugate  us.      This  is  a  world 
of  compensation ;  and  he  who 
would  be  no  slave  must  consent 
to  have  no  slave.     Those  who 
deny    freedom    to    others    de- 
serve it  not  for  themselves,  and, 
under  a  just  God,  cannot  long 
retain  it. 

All  honor  to  Jefferson  — to 
the  man  who,  in  the  concrete 
pressure  of  a  struggle  for  na- 
tional independence  by  a  single 
people,  had  the  coolness,  fore- 
cast, and  capacity  to  introduce 
into  a  merely  revolutionary 
document  an  abstract  truth, 
applicable   to  all  men  and  all 

72 


times,  and  so  to  embalm  it 
there  that  to-day  and  in  all 
coming  days  it  shall  be  a  re- 
buke and  a  stumbling-block  to 
the  very  harbingers  of  reap- 
pearing tyranny  and  oppres- 
sion. 


73 


XVII 

A    LOOK    INTO    THE    FUTURE 

From  a  speech  delivered  at  Cincinnati,  Ohio, 
September  17,  1859. 

We  know  that  "  you  are  all  of 
a  feather,"  and  that  we  have  to 
beat  you  all  together,  and  we 
expect    to    do    it.     We    don't 
intend   to   be    very    impatient 
about  it.     We  mean  to  be  as 
deliberate  and  calm  about  it  as 
it  is  possible  to  be,  but  as  firm 
•  and  resolved  as  it  is  possible 
for  men  to  be.     When  .we  do 
as  we  say,  beat  you,  you  per- 
haps want  to   know  what   we 
will  do  with  you. 

I  will  tell  you,  so  far  as  I 
am    authorized    to    speak    for 
the  opposition,  what  we  mean 
74 


to  do  with  you.  We  mean 
to  treat  you,  as  near  as  we 
possibly  can,  as  Washington, 
Jefferson,  and  Madison  treated 
you.  We  mean  to  leave  you 
alone,  and  in  no  way  to  inter- 
fere with  your  institution ;  to 
abide  by  all  and  every  com- 
promise of  the  Constitution, 
and,  in  a  word,  coming  back  to 
the  original  proposition,  to  treat 
you,  so  far  as  degenerated  men 
(if  we  have  degenerated)  may, 
according  to  the  example  of 
those  noble  fathers — Washing- 
ton, Jefferson,  and  Madison. 
We  mean  to  remember  that 
you  are  as  good  as  we ;  that 
there  is  no  difference  between 
us  other  than  the  difference  of 
circumstances.  We  mean  to 
recognize  and  bear  in  mind 
always  that  you  have  as  good 
hearts  in  your  bosoms  as  other 
people,  or  as  we  claim  to  have, 
and  treat  you  accordingly.    We 

75 


mean  to  marry  your  girls  when 
we  have  a  chance— the  white 
ones,  I  mean,  and  I  have  the 
honor  to  inform  you  that  I 
once  did  have  a  chance  in  that 
way. 

I  have  told  you  what  we 
mean  to  do.  I  want  to  know, 
now,  when  that  thing  takes 
place,  what  do  you  mean  to 
do?  I  often  hear  it  intimated 
that  you  mean  to  divide  the 
Union  whenever  a  Republican 
or  anything  like  it  is  elected 
President  of  the  United  States. 
[A  voice:  "That  is  so."] 
"  That  is  so,"  one  of  them  says  ; 
I  wonder  if  he  is  a  Kentuck- 
ian?  [A  voice:  "He  is  a 
Douglas  man."]  Well,  then,  I 
want  to  know  what  you  are 
going  to  do  with  your  half  of 
it.  Are  you  going  to  split  the 
Ohio  down  through,  and  push 
your  half  off  a  piece?  Or  are 
you    going    to     keep    it    right 

76 


alongside  of  us  outrageous  fel- 
lows? Or  are  you  going  to 
build  up  a  wall  some  way  be- 
tween your  country  and  ours, 
by  which  that  movable  prop- 
erty of  yours  can't  come  over 
here  any  more,  to  the  danger 
of  your  losing  it?  Do  you 
think  you  can  better  yourselves 
on  that  subject  by  leaving  us 
here  under  no  obligation  what- 
ever to  return  those  specimens 
of  your  movable  property  that 
come  hither? 

You  have  divided  the  Union 
because  we  would  not  do  right 
with  you,  as  you  think,  upon 
that  subject ;  when  we  cease  to 
be  under  obligations  to  do  any- 
thing for  you,  how  much  bet- 
ter off  do  you  think  you  will 
be?  Will  you  make  war  upon 
us  and  kill  us  all?  Why,  gen- 
tlemen, I  think  you  are  as  gal- 
lant and  as  brave  men  as  live  ; 
that  you  can  fight  as  bravely  in 


a  good  cause,  man  for  man,  as 
any  other  people  living ;  that 
you  have  shown  yourselves 
capable  of  this  upon  various 
occasions  ;  but  man  for  man, 
you  are  not  better  than  we  are, 
and  there  are  not  so  many  of 
you  as  there  are  of  us.  You 
will  never  make  much  of  a  hand 
at  whipping  us.  If  we  were 
fewer  in  numbers  than  you,  I 
think  that  you  could  whip  us ; 
if  we  were  equal  it  would  likely 
be  a  drawn  battle ;  but  being 
inferior  in  numbers,  you  will 
make  nothing  by  attempting  to 
master  us. 


78 


XVIII 

AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL 

From   a   letter   to    J.    W.    Fell,  dated    De- 
cember 20,  1859. 

I  was  born  February  12,  1809, 
in  Hardin  County,  Kentucky. 
My  parents  were  both  born  in 
Virginia,  of  undistinguished 
families — second  families,  per- 
haps I  should  say.  My  mother, 
who  died  in  my  tenth  year,  was 
of  a  family  of  the  name  of 
Hanks,  some  of  whom  now  re- 
side in  Adams,  and  others  in 
Macon  County,  Illinois.  My 
paternal  grandfather,  Abraham 
Lincoln,  emigrated  from  Rock- 
ingham County,  Virginia,  to 
Kentucky  about  1781  or  1782, 
where  a  year  or  two  later  he  was 

79 


killed  by  the  Indians,  not  in 
battle,  but  by  stealth,  when  he 
was  laboring  to  open  a  farm  in 
the  forest.  His  ancestors,  who 
were  Quakers,  went  to  Virginia 
from  Berks  County,  Pennsyl- 
vania. An  effort  to  identify 
them  with  the  New  England 
family  of  the  same  name  ended 
in  nothing  more  definite  than 
a  similarity  of  Christian  names 
in  both  families,  such  as  Enoch, 
Levi,  Mordecai,  Solomon, 
Abraham,  and  the  like. 

My  father,  at  the  death  of 
his  father,  was  but  six  years  of 
age,  and  he  grew  up  literally 
without  education.  He  re- 
moved from  Kentucky  to 
what  is  now  Spencer  County, 
Indiana,  in  my  eighth  year. 
We  reached  our  new  home 
about  the  time  the  State  came 
into  the  Union.  It  was  a  wild 
region,  with  many  bears  and 
other  wild  animals  still  in  the 


80 


woods.      There    I    grew    up. 
There  were   some  schools,  so 
called,  but  no  qualification  was 
ever  required  of  a  teacher  be- 
yond   "readin',    writin',     and 
cipherin'  "  to  the  rule  of  three. 
If  a  straggler  supposed  to  un- 
derstand  Latin    happened    to 
sojourn  in  the  neighborhood, he 
was  looked  upon  as  a  wizard. 
There  was   absolutely  nothing 
to  excite  ambition  for  educa- 
tion.    Of  course,  when  I  came 
of  age  I  did  not  know  much. 
Still,  somehow,  I    could   read, 
write,  and  cipher  to  the  rule  of 
three,  but  that  was  all.      I  have 
not  been  to  school  since.     The 
little  advance  I  now  have  upon 
this  store  of  education  I  have 
picked  up  from  time  to  time 
under  the  pressure  of  necessity. 
I  was  raised  to  farm  work, 
which   I   continued  till   I   was 
twenty-two.     At  twenty-one  I 
came  to  Illinois,  Macon  County. 

G  81 


Then  I  got  to  New  Salem,  at 
that  time  in  Sangamon,  now  in 
Menard  County,  where  I  re- 
mained a  year  as  a  sort  of  clerk 
in  a  store. 

Then  came  the  Black  Hawk 
War ;  and  I  was  elected  a  cap- 
tain   of  volunteers,  a   success 
which  gave  me  more  pleasure 
than  any  I  have  had  since.      I 
went  the  campaign,  was  elated, 
ran  for  the  legislature  the  same 
year  (1832),  and  was  beaten  — 
the  only  time  I  ever  have  been 
beaten    by    the    people.     The 
next  and  three  succeeding  bien- 
nial elections  I  was  elected  to 
the   legislature.     I  was   not  a 
candidate  afterward.      During 
this    legislative    period   I    had 
studied   law,  and  removed  to 
Springfield  to  practise  it.     In 
1846  I  was  once  elected  to  the 
lower     House     of     Congress. 
Was   not  a  candidate  for  re- 
election.    From  1849  to  1854.. 

82 


both  inclusive,  practised  law 
more  assiduously  than  ever  be- 
fore. Always  a  Whig  in  poli- 
tics ;  and  generally  on  the  Whig 
electoral  tickets,  making  active 
canvasses.  I  was  losing  inter- 
est in  politics  when  the  repeal 
of  the  Missouri  Compromise 
aroused  me  again.  What  I 
have  done  since  then  is  pretty 
well  known. 

If  any  personal  description 
of  me  is  thought  desirable,  it 
may  be  said  I  am,  in  height, 
six  feet  four  inches,  nearly ; 
lean  in  flesh,  weighing  on  an 
average  one  hundred  and 
eighty  pounds  ;  dark  complex- 
ion, with  coarse  black  hair  and 
gray  eyes.  No  other  marks  or 
brands  recollected. 


83 


XIX 

AN    APPEAL    TO    THE    SOUTH 

From  the  address  delivered  at  Cooper  In- 
stitute, New  York,  February  27,  i860. 

And  now,  if  they  would  listen, 
— as  I  suppose  they  will  not, 
—  I  would  address  a  few  words 
to  the  Southern  people. 

I  would  say  to  them :  You 
consider  yourselves  a  reason- 
able and  a  just  people ;  and  I 
consider  that  in  the  general 
qualities  of  reason  and  justice 
you  are  not  inferior  to  any 
other  people.  Still,  when  you 
speak  of  us  Republicans,  you 
do  so  only  to  denounce  us  as 
reptiles,  or,  at  the  best,  as  no 
better  than  outlaws.  You  will 
grant   a  hearing  to   pirates  or 

84 


murderers,  but  nothing  like  it 
to  "  Black  Republicans."  In 
all  your  contentions  with  one 
another,  each  of  you  deems  an 
unconditional  condemnation  of 
"  Black  Republicanism  "  as  the 
first  thing  to  be  attended  to. 
Indeed,  such  condemnation  of 
us  seems  to  be  an  indispensa- 
ble prerequisite — license,  so  to 
speak — among  you  to  be  ad- 
mitted or  permitted  to  speak  at 
all.  Now,  can  vou  or  not  be 
prevailed  upon  to  pause  and  to 
consider  whether  this  is  quite 
just  to  us,  or  even  to  your- 
selves? Bring  forward  your 
charges  and  specifications,  and 
then  be  patient  long  enough  to 
hear  us  deny  or  justify. 

You  say  we  are  sectional. 
We  deny  it.  That  makes  an 
issue  ;  and  the  burden  of  proof 
is  upon  you.  You  produce 
your  proof;  and  what  is  it? 
Why,  that  our  party  has  no  ex- 

85 


istence  in  your  section — gets  no 
votes  in  your  section.  The 
fact  is  substantially  true ;  but 
does  it  prove  the  issue?  If  it 
does,  then,  in  case  we  should, 
without  change  of  principle, 
begin  to  get  votes  in  your  sec- 
tion, we  should  thereby  cease 
to  be  sectional.  You  cannot 
escape  this  conclusion ;  and 
yet,  are  you  willing  to  abide  by 
it?  If  you  are,  you  will  prob- 
ably soon  find  that  we  have 
ceased  to  be  sectional,  for  we 
shall  get  votes  in  your  section 
this  very  year.  You  will  then 
begin  to  discover,  as  the  truth 
plainly  is,  that  your  proof  does 
not  touch  the  issue.  The  fact 
that  we  get  no  votes  in  your 
section  is  a  fact  of  your  mak- 
ing, and  not  of  ours. 

And  if  there  be  fault  in  that 
fact,  that  fault  is  primarily 
yours,  and  remains  so  until  you 
show   that    we   repel    you    by 

86 


some  wrong  principle  or  prac- 
tice.     If  we  do  repel  you  by 
any  wrong  principle  or   prac- 
tice, the  fault  is  ours ;  but  this 
brings  you  to  where  you  ought 
to  have  started— to  a  discus- 
sion of  the  right  or  wrong  of 
our  principle.    If  our  principle, 
put  in   practice,  would  wrong 
your  section  for  the  benefit  of 
ours,  or  for  any  other  object,, 
then  our  principle,  and  we  with 
it,  are  sectional,  and  are  justly 
opposed     and    denounced    as 
such.     Meet  us,  then,  on  the 
question  of  whether  our  prin- 
ciple, put    in    practice,  would 
wrong  your   section ;    and    so 
meet  us  as  if  it  were  possible 
that  something  may  be  said  on 
our  side.     Do  you  accept  the 
challenge?      No!      Then  you 
really  believe  that  the  principle 
which  "  our  fathers  who  framed 
the  government  under  which  we 
live"  thought  so  clearly  right 

87 


as  to  adopt  it,  and  indorse  it 
again  and  again,  upon  their 
official  oaths,  is  in  fact  so 
clearly  wrong  as  to  demand 
your  condemnation  without  a 
moment's  consideration. 

Some  of  you  delight  to  flaunt 
in     our     faces     the     warning 
against  sectional  parties  given 
by  Washington  in  his  Farewell 
Address.    Less  than  eight  years 
before   Washington   gave  that 
warning  he  had,  as  President 
of  the  United  States,  approved 
and  signed  an  act  of  Congress 
enforcing    the   prohibition    of 
slavery    in    the    Northwestern 
Territory,  which  act  embodied 
the  policy  of  the   government 
upon  that  subject  up  to  and  at 
the  very   moment   he   penned 
that  warning;   and  about  one 
year  after   he    penned    it,    he 
wrote  Lafayette  that  he  consid- 
ered   that    prohibition   a  wise 
measure,  expressing  in  the  same 

88 


connection  his  hope  that  we 
should  at  some  time  have  a 
confederacy  of  free  States. 

Bearing  this  in  mind,  and 
seeing  that  sectionalism  has 
since  arisen  upon  this  same 
subject,  is  that  warning  a 
weapon  in  your  hands  against 
us,  or  in  our  hands  against  you  ? 
Could  Washington  himself 
speak,  would  he  cast  the  blame 
of  that  sectionalism  upon  us, 
who  sustain  his  policy,  or  upon 
you,  who  repudiate  it?  We 
respect  that  warning  of  Wash- 
ington, and  we  commend  it  to 
you,  together  with  his  example 
pointing  to  the  right  applica- 
tion of  it. 

But  you  say  you  are  con- 
servative,—  eminently  conser- 
vative,—  while  we  are  revolu- 
tionary, destructive,  or  some- 
thing of  the  sort. 

What  is  conservatism?  Is 
it  not  adherence  to  the  old  and 


tried,  against  the  new  and  un- 
tried? We  stick  to,  contend 
for,  the  identical  old  policy  on 
the  point  in  controversy  which 
was  adopted  by  "  our  fathers 
who  framed  the  government 
under  which  we  live  "  ;  while 
you  with  one  accord  reject,  and 
scout,  and  spit  upon  that  old 
policy,  and  insist  upon  substi- 
tuting something  new. 

True,  you  disagree  among 
yourselves  as  to  what  that  sub- 
stitute shall  be.  You  are  di- 
vided on  new  propositions  and 
plans,  but  you  are  unanimous 
in  rejecting  and  denouncing 
the  old  policy  of  the  fathers. 
Some  of  you  are  for  reviving 
the  foreign  slave-trade ;  some 
for  a  congressional  slave  code 
for  the  Territories ;  some  for 
Congress  forbidding  the  Terri- 
tories to  prohibit  slavery  within 
their  limits  ;  some  for  maintain- 
ing slavery  in  the  Territories 

90 


through  the  judiciary  ;  some  for 
the  "  gur-reat  pur-rinciple  "  that 
"  if  one  man  would  enslave  an- 
other, no  third  man  should 
object,"  fantastically  called 
"popular  sovereignty";  but 
never  a  man  among  you  is  in 
favor  of  Federal  prohibition  of 
slavery  in  Federal  Territories, 
according  to  the  practice  of 
"our  fathers  who  framed  the 
government  under  which  we 
live."  Not  one  of  all  your 
various  plans  can  show  a  pre- 
cedent or  an  advocate  in  the 
century  within  which  our  gov- 
ernment originated. 

Consider,  then,  whether  your 
claim  for  conservatism  for 
yourselves,  and  your  charge  of 
destructiveness  against  us,  are 
based  on  the  most  clear  and 
stable  foundations. 

Again,  you  say  we  have 
made  the  slavery  question  more 
prominent  than  it  formerly  was. 

91 


We  deny  it.  We  admit  that  it 
is  more  prominent,  but  we  deny 
that  we  made  it  so.  It  was  not 
we,  but  you,  who  discarded  the 
old  policy  of  the  fathers.  We 
resisted,  and  still  resist,  your 
innovation  ;  and  thence  comes 
the  greater  prominence  of  the 
question.  Would  you  have 
that  question  reduced  to  its 
former  proportions?  Go  back 
to  that  old  policy.  What  has 
been  will  be  again,  under  the 
same  conditions.  If  you  would 
have  the  peace  of  the  old  times, 
readopt  the  precepts  and  pol- 
icy of  the  old  times. 

You  charge  that  we  stir  up 
insurrections  among  your 
slaves.  We  denv  it ;  and  what 
is  your  proof?  Harper's  Ferry! 
John  Brown!  !  John  Brown 
was  no  Republican ;  and  you 
have  failed  to  implicate  a  single 
Republican  in  his  Harper's 
Ferry  enterprise.     If  any  mem- 

92 


ber  of  our  party  is  guilty  in 
that  matter,  you  know  it,  or 
you  do  not  know  it.  If  you 
do  know  it,  you  are  inexcusa- 
ble for  not  designating  the  man 
and  proving  the  fact.  If  you 
do  not  know  it,  you  are  inex- 
cusable for  asserting  it,  and  es- 
pecially for  persisting  in  the 
assertion  after  vou  have  tried 
and  failed  to  make  the  proof. 
You  need  not  be  told  that  per- 
sisting in  a  charge  which  one 
does  not  know  to  be  true  is 
simply  malicious  slander. 

Some  of  you  admit  that  no 
Republican  designedly  aided  or 
encouraged  the  Harper's  Ferry 
affair,  but  still  insist  that  our 
doctrines  and  declarations  ne- 
cessarily lead  to  such  results. 
We  do  not  believe  it.  We 
know  we  hold  no  doctrine,  and 
make  no  declaration,  which 
were  not  held  to  and  made  by 
"our  fathers  who  framed   the 


93 


government  under  which  we 
live."  You  never  dealt  fairly 
by  us  in  relation  to  this  affair. 
When  it  occurred,  some  impor- 
tant State  elections  were  near 
at  hand,  and  you  were  in  evi- 
dent glee  with  the  belief  that, 
by  charging  the  blame  upon 
us,  you  could  get  an  advantage 
of  us  in  those  elections.  The 
elections  came,  and  your  ex- 
pectations were  not  quite  ful- 
filled. Every  Republican  man 
knew  that,  as  to  himself  at  least, 
your  charge  was  a  slander,  and 
he  was  not  much  inclined  by 
it  to  cast  his  vote  in  vour  favor. 

J 

Republican  doctrines  and  dec- 
larations are  accompanied  with 
a  continual  protest  against  any 
interference  whatever  with 
your  slaves,  or  with  you  about 
your  slaves.  Surely  this  does 
not  encourage  them  to  revolt. 
True,  we  do,  in  common  with 
"our  fathers  who  framed  the 

94 


government   under   which  we 
live,"    declare   our  belief  that 
slavery  is  wrong ;  but  the  slaves 
do   not   hear   us  declare  even 
this.     For  anything  we  say  or 
do,  the  slaves  would  scarcely 
know   there   is    a    Republican 
party.     I   believe   they  would 
not,  in  fact,  generally  know  it 
but  for  your  misrepresentations 
of  us  in  their  hearing.     In  your 
political  contests  among  your- 
selves,   each    faction    charges 
the  other  with  sympathy  with 
Black      Republicanism ;      and 
then,    to     give    point    to    the 
charge,  defines  Black  Repub- 
licanism   to   simply    be    insur- 
rection,   blood,    and    thunder 
among  the  slaves. 

Slave  insurrections  are  no 
more  common  now  than  they 
were  before  the  Republican 
party  was  organized.  What 
induced  the  Southampton  in- 
surrection, twenty-eight  years 


95 


ago,  in  which  at  least  three 
times  as  many  lives  were  lost 
as  at  Harper's  Ferry?  You  can 
scarcely  stretch  your  very  elas- 
tic fancy  to  the  conclusion  that 
Southampton  was  "  got  up  by 
Black  Republicanism."  In  the 
present  state  of  things  in  the 
United  States,  I  do  not  think 
a  general,  or  even  a  very  ex- 
tensive, slave  insurrection  is 
possible.  The  indispensable 
concert  of  action  cannot  be  at- 
tained. The  slaves  have  no 
means  of  rapid  communica- 
tion ;  nor  can  incendiary  free- 
men, black  or  white,  supply  it. 
The  explosive  materials  are 
everywhere  in  parcels ;  but 
there  neither  are,  nor  can  be 
supplied,  the  indispensable 
connecting    trains. 

Much  is  said  by  Southern 
people  about  the  affection  of 
slaves  for  their  masters  and 
mistresses  ;  and  a  part  of  it,  at 

96 


least,  is  true.  A  plot  for  an 
uprising  could  scarcely  be  de- 
vised and  communicated  to 
twenty  individuals  before  some 
one  of  them,  to  save  the  life  of 
a  favorite  master  or  mistress, 
would  divulge  it.  This  is  the 
rule ;  and  the  slave  revolution 
in  Haiti  was  not  an  exception 
to  it,  but  a  case  occurring 
under  peculiar  circumstances. 
The  Gunpowder  Plot  of  British 
history,  though  not  connected 
with  slaves,  was  more  in  point. 
In  that  case,  only  about  twenty 
were  admitted  to  the  secret ; 
and  yet  one  of  them,  in  his  anx- 
iety to  save  a  friend,  betrayed 
the  plot  to  that  friend,  and,  by 
consequence,  averted  the  ca- 
lamity. Occasional  poisonings 
from  the  kitchen,  and  open  or 
stealthy  assassinations  in  the 
field,  and  local  revolts  extend- 
ing to  a  score  or  so,  will  con- 
tinue  to   occur  as  the  natural 

7  97 


results  of  slavery ;  but  no  gen- 
eral insurrection  of  slaves,  as  I 
think,  can  happen  in  this  coun- 
try for  a  long  time.  Whoever 
much  fears,  or  much  hopes,  for 
such  an  event,  will  be  alike  dis- 
appointed. 

In  the  language  of  Mr.  Jef- 
ferson, uttered  many  years  ago, 
'  It  is  still  in  our  power  to  di- 
rect the  process  of  emancipa- 
tion and  deportation  peaceably, 
and  in  such  slow  degrees  as 
that  the  evil  will  wear  off  in- 
sensibly, and  their  places  be, 
pari  passu,  filled  up  by  free 
white  laborers.  If,  on  the 
contrary,  it  is  left  to  force  itself 
on,  human  nature  must  shudder 
at  the  prospect  held  up." 

Mr.  Jefferson  did  not  mean 
to  say,  nor  do  I,  that  the  power 
of  emancipation  is  in  the  Fed- 
eral Government.  He  spoke 
of  Virginia;  and,  as  to  the 
power  of  emancipation,  I  speak 

98 


of  the  slaveholding  States 
only.  The  Federal  Govern- 
ment, however,  as  we  insist,  has 
the  power  of  restraining  the 
extension  of  the  institution — 
the  power  to  insure  that  a  slave 
insurrection  shall  never  occur 
on  any  American  soil  which  is 
now  free  from  slavery. 

John  Brown's  effort  was 
peculiar.  It  was  not  a  slave 
insurrection.  It  was  an  at- 
tempt by  white  men  to  get  up 
a  revolt  among  slaves,  in  which 
the  slaves  refused  to  partici- 
pate. In  fact,  it  was  so  absurd 
that  the  slaves,  with  all  their  ig- 
norance, saw  plainly  enough  it 
could  not  succeed.  That  affair, 
in  its  philosophy,  corresponds 
with  the  many  attempts,  related 
in  history,  at  the  assassination 
of  kings  and  emperors.  An 
enthusiast  broods  over  the  op- 
pression of  a  people  till  he 
fancies   himself  commissioned 

99 


by  Heaven   to   liberate   them. 
He  ventures  the  attempt,  which 
ends  in  little  else  than  his  own 
execution.    Orsini's  attempt  on 
Louis     Napoleon,    and     John 
Brown's   attempt   at    Harper's 
Ferry,  were,  in  their  philosophy, 
precisely  the   same.     The   ea- 
gerness to  cast  blame  on  old 
England  in  the  one  case,  and 
on  New  England  in  the  other, 
does  not  disprove  the  sameness 
of  the  two  things. 

And    how    much    would    it 
avail  you  if  you  could,  by  the 
use  of  John   Brown,  Helper's 
book,  and  the   like,  break  up 
the   Republican   organization? 
Human  action  can  be  modified 
to  some  extent,  but  human  na- 
ture cannot  be  changed.  There 
is   a  judgment   and   a   feeling 
against  slavery  in  this  nation, 
which   cast  at  least   a  million 
and  a  half  of  votes.     You  can- 
not destroy  that  judgment  and 

IOC 


feeling— that  sentiment  —  by 
breaking  up  the  political  organi- 
zation which  rallies  around  it. 
You  can  scarcely  scatter  and 
disperse  an  army  which  has 
been  formed  into  order  in  the 
face  of  your  heaviest  fire ;  but 
if  you  could,  how  much  would 
you  gain  by  forcing  the  senti- 
ment which  created  it  out  of  the 
peaceful  channel  of  the  ballot- 
box  into  some  other  channel? 
What  would  that  other  channel 
probably  be  ?  W  ould  the  num- 
ber of  John  Browns  be  lessened 
or  enlarged  by  the  operation? 

But  you  will  break  up  the 
Union  rather  than  submit  to  a 
denial  of  your  constitutional 
rights. 

That  has  a  somewhat  reck- 
less sound;  but  it  would  be 
palliated,  if  not  fully  justified, 
were  we  proposing,  by  the  mere 
force  of  numbers,  to  deprive  you 
of  some  right  plainly  written 
101 


down  in  the  Constitution.    But 
we  are  proposing  no  such  thing. 
When  you  make  these  dec- 
larations you  have  a   specific 
and  well-understood  allusion  to 
an  assumed  constitutional  right 
of  yours  to  take  slaves  into  the 
Federal  Territories,  and  to  hold 
them  there  as  property.    But  no 
such  right  is  specifically  written 
in  the  Constitution.      That  in- 
strument is  literally  silent  about 
any  such   right.      We,  on  the 
contrary,  deny  that  such  a  right 
has  any  existence  in  the  Con- 
stitution, even  by  implication. 
Your  purpose,  then,  plainly 
stated,  is  that  you  will  destroy 
the  government,  unless  you  be 
allowed  to  construe  and  force 
the  Constitution  as  you  please, 
on  all  points  in  dispute  between 
you  and  us.     You  will  rule  or 
ruin  in  all  events. 

This,  plainly  stated,  is  your 
language.       Perhaps   you   will 


102 


say  the  Supreme  Court  has  de- 
cided   the    disputed    constitu- 
tional question  in  your  favor. 
Not  quite  so.     But  waiving  the 
lawyer's    distinction     between 
dictum  and  decision,  the  court 
has   decided  the   question  for 
you  in  a  sort  of  way.    The  court 
has  substantially  said,  it  is  your 
constitutional     right    to     take 
slaves  into  the   Federal  Terri- 
tories, and  to  hold  them  there 
as  property.      When  I  say  the 
decision  was  made  in  a  sort  of 
way,  I  mean  it  was  made  in  a 
divided  court,  by  a  bare  ma- 
jority of  the  judges,  and  they 
not  quite  agreeing  with  one  an- 
other in  the  reasons  for  mak- 
ing it;    that  it  is  so  made  as 
that  its  avowed  supporters  dis- 
agree with  one  another  about 
its  meaning,  and    that    it  was 
mainly  based  upon  a  mistaken 
statement    of   fact— the    state- 
ment in  the  opinion  that  "the 

103 


right  of  property  in  a  slave  is 
distinctly  and  expressly  af- 
firmed in  the  Constitution." 

An  inspection  of  the  Consti- 
tution will  show  that  the  right 
of  property  in  a  slave  is  not 
"distinctly  and  expressly  af- 
firmed "  in  it.  Bear  in  mind, 
the  judges  do  not  pledge  their 
judicial  opinion  that  such  right 
is  impliedly  affirmed  in  the  Con- 
stitution ;  but  they  pledge  their 
veracity  that  it  is  "distinctly 
and  expressly  "  affirmed  there 
—  "distinctly,"  that  is,  not 
mingled  with  anything  else ; 
'"  expressly,"  that  is,  in  words 
meaning  just  that,  without  the 
aid  of  any  inference,  and  sus- 
ceptible of  no  other  meaning. 

If  they  had  only  pledged 
their  judicial  opinion  that  such 
right  is  affirmed  in  the  instru- 
ment by  implication,  it  would 
be  open  to  others  to  show  that 
neither  the  word  "slave"  nor 

104 


"  slavery  "  is  to  be  found  in  the 
Constitution,  nor  the  word 
"property,"  even,  in  any  con- 
nection with  language  alluding 
to  the  things  slave  or  slavery  ; 
and  that  wherever  in  that  in- 
strument the  slave  is  alluded  to, 
he  is  called  a  "person";  and 
wherever  his  master's  legal 
right  in  relation  to  him  is  al- 
luded to,  it  is  spoken  of  as 
"service  or  labor  which  may 
be  due  "  —  as  a  debt  payable  in 
service  or  labor.  Also  it  would 
be  open  to  show,  by  contem- 
poraneous history,  that  this 
mode  of  alluding  to  slaves  and 
slavery,  instead  of  speaking  of 
them,  was  employed  on  pur- 
pose to  exclude  from  the  Con- 
stitution the  idea  that  there 
could  be  property  in  man. 

To  show  all  this  is  easy  and 
certain. 

When  this  obvious  mistake 
of  the  judges  shall  be  brought 

105 


to  their  notice,  is  it  not  reason- 
able  to  expect  that  they  will 
withdraw  the  mistaken  state- 
ment, and  reconsider  the  con- 
clusion based  upon  it? 

And  then  it  is  to  be  remem- 
bered that  "  our  fathers  who 
framed  the  government  under 
which  we  live  " — the  men  who 
made  the  Constitution — de- 
cided this  same  constitutional 
question  in  our  favor  long  ago  : 
decided  it  without  division 
among  themselves  when  mak- 
ing the  decision  ;  without  divi- 
sion among  themselves  about 
the  meaning  of  it  after  it  was 
made,  and,  so  far  as  any  evi- 
dence is  left,  without  basing  it 
upon  any  mistaken  statement 
of  facts. 

Under  all  these  circum- 
stances, do  you  really  feel 
yourselves  justified  to  break  up 
this  government  unless  such  a 
court  decision  as  yours  is  shall 

106 


be  at  once  submitted  to  as  a 
conclusive  and  final  rule  of 
political  action?  But  you  will 
not  abide  the  election  of  a 
Republican  President!  In  that 
supposed  event,  you  say,  you 
will  destroy  the  Union ;  and 
then,  you  say,  the  great  crime 
of  having  destroyed  it  will  be 
upon  us!  That  is  cool.  A 
highwayman  holds  a  pistol  to 
my  ear,  and  mutters  through 
his  teeth,  "  Stand  and  deliver, 
or  I  shall  kill  you,  and  then 
you  will  be  a  murderer!" 

To  be  sure,  what  the  robber 
demanded  of  me  — my  money 
—  was  my  own  ;  and  I  had  a 
clear  right  to  keep  it :  but  it  was 
no  more  my  own  than  my  vote 
is  my  own  ;  and  the  threat  of 
death  to  me,  to  extort  my 
money,  and  the  threat  of  de- 
struction to  the  Union,  to  ex- 
tort my  vote,  can  scarcely  be 
distinguished  in  principle. 

107 


XX 

FAREWELL    ADDRESS    AT 

SPRINGFIELD.    ILLINOIS, 

FEBRUARY    II,   I  86  I 

My  Friends  :  No  one  not  in 
my  situation  can  appreciate  my 
feeling  of  sadness  at  this  part- 
ing. To  this  place,  and  the 
kindness  of  these  people,  I  owe 
everything.  Here  I  have  lived 
a  quarter  of  a  century,  and 
have  passed  from  a  young  to 
an  old  man.  Here  my  children 
have  been  born,  and  one  is 
buried.  I  now  leave,  not  know- 
ing when  or  whether  ever  I 
may  return,  with  a  task  before 
me  greater  than  that  which 
rested  upon  Washington. 
Without  the  assistance  of  that 

108 


Divine  Being  who  ever  at- 
tended him  I  cannot  succeed. 
With  that  assistance  I  cannot 
fail.  Trusting  in  him,  who 
can  go  with  me  and  remain 
with  you,  and  be  everywhere 
for  good,  let  us  confidently 
hope  that  all  will  yet  be  well. 
To  his  care  commending  you, 
as  I  hope  in  your  prayers  you 
will  commend  me,  I  bid  you  an 
affectionate  farewell. 


109 


XXI 

FROM       HIS       REPLY       TO       THE 

ADDRESS      OF      WELCOME     AT 

INDIANAPOLIS,      INDIANA, 

FEBRUARY   II,    I  86 I 

In  all  trying  positions  in  which 
I  shall  be  placed,  and  doubtless 
I  shall  be  placed  in  many  such, 
my  reliance  will  be  upon  you 
and  the  people  of  the  United 
States ;  and  I  wish  you  to  re- 
member, now  and  forever,  that 
it  is  your  business,  and  not 
mine  ;  that  if  the  union  of  these 
States  and  the  liberties  of  this 
people  shall  be  lost,  it  is  but 
little  to  any  one  man  of  fifty- 
two  years  of  age,  but  a  great 
deal   to   the   thirty  millions  of 

J 

people  who  inhabit  these  U  nited 
no 


States,  and  to  their  posterity  in 
all  coming  time.  It  is  your 
business  to  rise  up  and  preserve 
the  Union  and  liberty  for  your- 
selves, and  not  for  me.  I 
appeal  to  you  again  to  con- 
stantly bear  in  mind  that  not 
with  politicians,  not  with  Presi- 
dents, not  with  office-seekers, 
but  with  you,  is  the  question : 
Shall  the  Union  and  shall  the 
liberties  of  this  country  be  pre- 
served to  the  latest  generations  ? 


*.U 


XXII 

ADDRESS        IN      INDEPENDENCE 

,    PHILADELPHIA, 

RUARY   22,    l86l 


HALL,    PHILADELPHIA,    FEB- 


I  am  filled  with  deep  emotion 
at  finding  myself  standing  in 
this  place,  where  were  collected 
together  the  wisdom,  the  patri- 
otism, the  devotion  to  princi- 
ple, from  which  sprang  the  in- 
stitutions under  which  we  live. 
You  have  kindly  suggested  to 
me  that  in  my  hands  is  the  task 
of  restoring  peace  to  our  dis- 
tracted country.  I  can  say  in 
return,  sir,  that  all  the  political 
sentiments  I  entertain  have  been 
drawn,  so  far  as  I  have  been 
able  to  draw  them,  from  the 
sentiments  which  originated  in 

112 


and  were  given  to  the  world 
from  this  hall.  I  have  never 
had  a  feeling,  politically,  that 
did  not  spring  from  the  senti- 
ments embodied  in  the  Dec- 
laration of  Independence. 

I  have  often  pondered  over 
the  dangers  which  were  incurred 
bv  the  men  who  assembled  here 
and  framed  and  adopted  that 
Declaration.  I  have  pondered 
over  the  toils  that  were  endured 
bv  the  officers  and  soldiers  of 
the  army  who  achieved  that 
independence.  I  have  often 
inquired  of  myself  what  great 
principle  or  idea  it  was  that 
kept  this  Confederacy  so  long 
together.  It  was  not  the  mere 
matter  of  separation  of  the 
colonies  from  the  motherland, 
but  that  sentiment  in  the  Dec- 
laration of  Independence 
which  gave  liberty  not  alone  to 
the  people  of  this  country,  but 
hope  to  all  the  world,  for  all  fu- 

113 


ture  time.  It  was  that  which 
gave  promise  that  in  due  time 
the  weights  would  be  lifted 
from  the  shoulders  of  all  men, 
and  that  all  should  have  an 
equal  chance.  This  is  the 
sentiment  embodied  in  the 
Declaration  of  Independence. 

Now,  my  friends,  can  this 
country  be  saved  on  that  basis? 
If  it  can,  I  will  consider  myself 
one  of  the  happiest  men  in  the 
world  if  I  can  help  to  save  it. 
If  it  cannot  be  saved  upon  that 
principle,  it  will  be  truly  awful. 
But  if  this  country  cannot  be 
saved  without  giving  up  that 
principle,  I  was  about  to  say  I 
would  rather  be  assassinated  on 
this  spot  than  surrender  it. 

Now,  in  my  view  of  the 
present  aspect  of  affairs,  there 
is  no  need  of  bloodshed  and 
war.  There  is  no  necessity  for 
it.  I  am  not  in  favor  of  such 
a  course  ;  and  I  may  say  in  ad- 

114 


vance  that  there  will  be  no 
bloodshed  unless  it  is  forced 
upon  the  government.  The 
government  will  not  use  force 
unless  force  is  used  against  it. 
My  friends,  this  is  wholly  an 
unprepared  speech.  I  did  not 
expect  to  be  called  on  to  say  a 
word  when  I  came  here.  I 
supposed  I  was  merely  to  do 
something  toward  raising  a  flag. 
I  may,  therefore,  have  said 
something  indiscreet.  But  I 
have  said  nothing  but  what  I 
am  willing  to  live  by,  and,  if  it 
be  the  pleasure  of  Almighty 
God,  to  die  by. 


115 


XXIII 

FIRST    INAUGURAL    ADDRESS, 
MARCH   4,    I  86  I 

Fellow-citizens  of  the  Utiited 
States  .-In  compliance  with  a 
custom  as  old  as  the  govern- 
ment itself,  I  appear  before 
you  to  address  you  briefly,  and 
to  take  in  your  presence  the 
oath  prescribed  by  the  Consti- 
tution of  the  United  States  to 
be  taken  by  the  President  "  be- 
fore he  enters  on  the  execution 
of  his  office." 

I  do  not  consider  it  neces- 
sary at  present  for  me  to  dis- 
cuss those  matters  of  adminis- 
tration about  which  there  is  no 
special  anxiety  or  excitement. 

Apprehension  seems  to  exist 

116 


among  the  people  of  the  South- 
ern States  that  bv  the  accession 
of  a  Republican  administration 
their  property  and  their  peace 
and  personal  security  are  to  be 
endangered.  There  has  never 
been  any  reasonable  cause  for 
such  apprehension.  Indeed, 
the  most  ample  evidence  to  the 
contrary  has  all  the  while  ex- 
isted and  been  open  to  their  in- 
spection. It  is  found  in  nearly 
all  the  published  speeches  of 
him  who  now  addresses  you. 
I  do  but  quote  from  one  of 
those  speeches  when  I  declare 
that  "  I  have  no  purpose,  di- 
rectly or  indirectly,  to  interfere 
with  the  institution  of  slavery 
in  the  States  where  it  exists. 
I  believe  I  have  no  lawful  right 
to  do  so,  and  I  have  no  inclina- 
tion to  do  so."  Those  who 
nominated  and  elected  me  did 
so  with  full  knowledge  that  I 
had  made  this  and  many  similar 

117 


declarations,  and  had  never  re- 
canted them.  And,  more  than 
this,  they  placed  in  the  platform 
for  my  acceptance,  and  as  a  law 
to  themselves  and  to  me,  the 
clear  and  emphatic  resolution 
which  I  now  read : 

Resolved,  That  the  maintenance  in- 
violate of  the  rights  of  the  States, 
and  especially  the  right  of  each  State 
to  order  and  control  its  own  domes- 
tic institutions  according  to  its  own 
judgment  exclusively,  is  essential  to 
that  balance  of  power  on  which  the 
perfection  and  endurance  of  our 
political  fabric  depend,  and  we  de- 
nounce the  lawless  invasion  by  armed 
force  of  the  soil  of  any  State  or  Ter- 
ritory, no  matter  under  what  pretext, 
as  among  the  gravest  of  crimes. 

I  now  reiterate  these  senti- 
ments; and,  in  doing  so,  I 
only  press  upon  the  public  at- 
tention the  most  conclusive 
evidence  of  which  the  case  is 
susceptible,  that  the  property, 
peace,  and  security  of  no  sec- 

118 


tion  are  to  be  in  any  wise  en- 
dangered by  the  now  incoming 
administration.  I  add,  too, 
that  all  the  protection  which, 
consistently  with  the  Constitu- 
tion and  the  laws,  can  be  given, 
will  be  cheerfully  given  to  all 
the  States  when  lawfully  de- 
manded, for  whatever  cause— 
as  cheerfully  to  one  section  as 
to  another. 

There  is  much  controversy 
about  the  delivering  up  of  fugi- 
tives from  service  or  labor. 
The  clause  I  now  read  is  as 
plainly  written  in  the  Constitu- 
tion as  any  other  of  its  provi- 
sions : 

No  person  held  to  service  or 
labor  in  one  State,  under  the  laws 
thereof,  escaping  into  another,  shall 
in  consequence  of  any  law  or  regula- 
tion therein  be  discharged  from  such 
service  or  labor,  but  shall  be  deliv- 
ered up  on  claim  of  the  party  to 
whom  such  service  or  labor  may  be 
due. 

119 


It  is  scarcely  questioned  that 
this  provision  was  intended  by 
those  who  made  it  for  the  re- 
claiming of  what  we  call  fugitive 
slaves  ;  and  the  intention  of  the 
lawgiver  is  the  law.     All  mem- 
bers  of   Congress  swear   their 
support  to  the  whole  Constitu- 
tion—to this  provision  as  much 
as  to  any  other.     To  the  prop- 
osition, then,  that  slaves  whose 
cases  come  within  the  terms  of 
'  this  clause  "shall  be  delivered 
up,"  their  oaths  are  unanimous. 
Now,  if  they  would  make  the 
effort   in   good   temper,  could 
they    not    with    nearly     equal 
unanimity  frame  and  pass  a  law 
by   means   of   which    to    keep 
good  that  unanimous  oath? 

There  is  some  difference  of 
opinion  whether  this  clause 
should  be  enforced  by  national 
or  by  State  authority  ;  but  surely 
that  difference  is  not  a  very 
material  one.      If  the  slave  is 


120 


to  be  surrendered,  it  can  be  of 
but  little  consequence  to  him 
or  to  others  by  which  authority 
it  is  done.  And  should  any- 
one in  any  case  be  content  that 
his  oath  shall  go  unkept  on  a 
merely  unsubstantial  contro- 
versy  as  to  how  it  shall  be 
kept? 

Again,  in  any  law  upon  this 
subject,  ought  not  all  the  safe- 
guards of  liberty  known  in  civ- 
ilized and  humane  jurispru- 
dence to  be  introduced,  so  that 
a  free  man  be  not,  in  any  case, 
surrendered  as  a  slave?  And 
might  it  not  be  well  at  the 
same  time  to  provide  by  law 
for  the  enforcement  of  that 
clause  in  the  Constitution 
which  guarantees  that  "  the 
citizen  of  each  State  shall  be 
entitled  to  all  privileges  and 
immunities  of  citizens  in  the 
several  States  "? 

I   take   the   official  oath  to- 


rn 


day  with  no  mental  reserva- 
tions, and  with  no  purpose  to 
construe  the  Constitution  or 
laws  by  any  hypercritical 
rules.  And  while  I  do  not 
choose  now  to  specify  particu- 
lar acts  of  Congress  as  proper 
to  be  enforced,  I  do  suggest 
that  it  will  be  much  safer  for 
all,  both  in  official  and  private 
stations,  to  conform  to  and 
abide  by  all  those  acts  which 
stand  unrepealed,  than  to  vio- 
late any  of  them,  trusting  to 
find  impunity  in  having  them 
held  to  be  unconstitutional. 

It  is  seventy-two  years  since 
the  first  inauguration  of  a  Presi- 
dent under  our  National  Con- 
stitution. During  that  period 
fifteen  different  and  greatly 
distinguished  citizens  have,  in 
succession,  administered  the 
executive  branch  of  the  govern- 
ment. They  have  conducted 
it    through    many    perils,    and 

122 


generally  with  great  success. 
Yet,  with  all  this  scope  of  pre- 
cedent, I  now  enter  upon  the 
same  task  for  the  brief  consti- 
tutional term  of  four  years 
under  great  and  peculiar  diffi- 
culty. A  disruption  of  the 
Federal  Union,  heretofore  only 
menaced,  is  now  formidably 
attempted. 

I  hold  that,  in  contemplation 
of  universal  law  and  of  the 
Constitution,  the  Union  of 
these  States  is  perpetual.  Per- 
petuity is  implied,  if  not  ex- 
pressed, in  the  fundamental  law 
of  all  national  governments. 
It  is  safe  to  assert  that  no  gov- 
ernment proper  ever  had  a 
provision  in  its  organic  law  for 
its  own  termination.  Continue 
to  execute  all  the  express  pro- 
visions of  our  National  Con- 
stitution, and  the  Union  will 
endure  forever — it  being  im- 
possible to  destroy  it  except  by 

123 


some  action  not  provided  for 
in  the  instrument  itself. 

Again,  if  the  United  States 
be  not  a  government  proper, 
but  an  association  of  States  in 
the  nature  of  contract  merely, 
can  it,  as  a  contract,  be  peace- 
ably unmade  by  less  than  all 
the  parties  who  made  it?  One 
party  to  a  contract  may  violate 
it — break  it,  so  to  speak ;  but 
does  it  not  require  all  to  law- 
fully rescind  it? 

Descending  from  these  gen- 
eral principles,  we  find  the  prop- 
osition that  in  legal  contem- 
plation the  Union  is  perpetual 
confirmed  by  the  history  of  the 
Union  itself.  The  Union  is 
much  older  than  the  Constitu- 
tion. It  was  formed,  in  fact, 
by  the  Articles  of  Association 
in  1774.  It  was  matured  and 
continued  by  the  Declaration 
of  Independence  in  1776.  It 
was  further  matured,  and  the 

124 


faith  of  all  the  then  thirteen 
States  expressly  plighted  and 
engaged  that  it  should  be  per- 
petual, by  the  Articles  of  Con- 
federation in  1778.  And,  fi- 
nally, in  1787  one  of  the  de- 
clared objects  for  ordaining 
and  establishing  the  Constitu- 
tion was  "  to  form  a  more  per- 
fect Union." 

But  if  the  destruction  of  the 
Union  by  one  or  by  a  part  only 
of  the  States  be  lawfully  pos- 
sible, the  Union  is  less  perfect 
than  before  the  Constitution, 
having  lost  the  vital  element  of 
perpetuity. 

It  follows  from  these  views 
that  no  State  upon  its  own 
mere  motion  can  lawfully  get 
out  of  the  Union ;  that  re- 
solves and  ordinances  to  that 
effect  are  legally  void  ;  and  that 
acts  of  violence,  within  any 
State  or  States,  against  the  au- 
thority of  the  United  States,  are 

125 


insurrectionary  or  revolution- 
ary, according  to  circum- 
stances. 

I  therefore  consider  that,  in 
viewof  the  Constitution  and  the 
laws,  the   Union  is  unbroken ; 
and  to  the  extent  of  my  ability 
I  shall  take  care,  as  the  Con- 
stitution itself  expressly  enjoins 
upon  me,  that  the  laws  of  the 
Union  be  faithfully  executed  in 
all   the   States.     Doing  this  I 
deem  to  be  only  a  simple  duty 
on  my  part ;  and  I  shall  per- 
form it  so   far  as  practicable, 
unless  my  rightful  masters,  the 
American   people,   shall   with- 
hold the  requisite  means,  or  in 
some  authoritative  manner  di- 
rect the  contrary.      I  trust  this 
will  not  be  regarded  as  a  men- 
ace, but  only  as  the  declared 
purpose  of  the  Union  that  it 
will  constitutionally  defend  and 
maintain  itself. 

In  doing  this  there  needs  to 


126 


be  no  bloodshed  or  violence ; 
and  there  shall  be  none,  unless 
it  be  forced  upon  the  national 
authority.  The  power  con- 
fided to  me  will  be  used  to 
hold,  occupy,  and  possess  the 
property  and  places  belonging 
to  the  government,  and  to  col- 
lect the  duties  and  imposts  ;  but 
beyond  what  may  be  necessarv 
for  these  objects,  there  will  be 
no  invasion,  no  using  of  force 
against  or  among  the  people 
anywhere.  Where  hostility  to 
the  United  States,  in  any  in- 
terior locality,  shall  be  so  great 
and  universal  as  to  prevent 
competent  resident  citizens 
from  holding  the  Federal 
offices,  there  will  be  no  attempt 
to  force  obnoxious  strangers 
among  the  people  for  that  ob- 
ject. While  the  strict  legal 
right  may  exist  in  the  govern- 
ment to  enforce  the  exercise 
of  these  offices,  the  attempt  to 

127 


do  so  would  be  so  irritating, 
and  so  nearly  impracticable 
withal,  that  I  deem  it  better  to 
forego  for  the  time  the  uses  of 
such  offices. 

The   mails,  unless    repelled, 
will  continue  to  be  furnished  in 
all  parts  of  the  Union.     So  far 
as  possible,  the  people  every- 
where shall  have  that  sense  of 
perfect  security  which  is  most 
favorable  to  calm  thought  and 
reflection.    The  course  here  in- 
dicated will  be  followed  unless 
current  events  and  experience 
shall   show   a   modification  or 
change   to   be  proper,   and  in 
every  case   and   exigency   my 
best  discretion  will  be  exercised 
according     to     circumstances 
actually  existing,  and   with   a 
view  and  a  hope  of  a  peace- 
ful   solution    of    the    national 
troubles  and  the  restoration  of 
fraternal  sympathies  and  affer, 
tions. 


128 


That  there  are  persons  in 
one  section  or  another  who 
seek  to  destroy  the  Union  at 
all  events,  and  are  glad  of  any 
pretext  to  do  it,  I  will  neither 
affirm  nor  deny  ;  but  if  there  be 
such,  I  need  address  no  word 
to  them.  To  those,  however, 
who  really  love  the  Union  may 
I  not  speak? 

Before  entering  upon  so 
grave  a  matter  as  the  destruc- 
tion of  our  national  fabric,  with 
all  its  benefits,  its  memories, 
and  its  hopes,  would  it  not  be 
wise  to  ascertain  precisely  why 
we  do  it?  Will  vou  hazard  so 
desperate  a  step  while  there  is 
anv  possibility  that  any  portion 
of  the  ills  you  fly  from  have  no 
real  existence?  Will  you, 
while  the  certain  ills  you  fly  to 
are  greater  than  all  the  real 
ones  you  fly  from  —  will  you 
risk  the  commission  of  so  fear- 
ful a  mistake? 

9  129 


All  profess  to  be  content  in 
the  Union  if  all  constitutional 
rights  can  be  maintained.     Is 
it   true,    then,  that   any   right, 
plainly  written  in  the   Consti- 
tution,   has    been    denied?     I 
think  not.     Happily  the  human 
mind  is  so  constituted  that  no 
party  can  reach  to  the  audacity 
of  doing   this.     Think,  if  you 
can,   of  a     single   instance    in 
which  a  plainly  written  provi- 
sion   of    the    Constitution    has 
ever  been   denied.      If  by  the 
mere  force   of  numbers  a  ma- 
jority should  deprive  a  minority 
of  any   clearly  written   consti- 
tutional  right,   it   might,   in   a 
moral    point    of    view,    justify 
revolution— certainly  would  if 
such  a  right  were  a  vital  one. 
But  such  is  not  our  case.     All 
the    vital   rights   of  minorities 
and     of     individuals     are    so 
plainly    assured    to    them    by 
affirmations      and      negations, 

130 


guaranties  and  prohibitions,  in 
the  Constitution,  that  contro- 
versies never  arise  concerning 
them.  But  no  organic  law  can 
ever  be  framed  with  a  provision 
specifically  applicable  to  every 
question  which  may  occur  in 
practical  administration.  No 
foresight  can  anticipate,  nor 
any  document  of  reasonable 
length  contain,  express  pro- 
visions for  all  possible  ques- 
tions. Shall  fugitives  from 
labor  be  surrendered  by  na- 
tional or  by  State  authority? 
The  Constitution  does  noi  ex- 
pressly say.  May  Congress 
prohibit  slavery  in  the  Terri- 
tories? The  Constitution  does 
not  expressly  say.  Must  Con- 
gress protect  slavery  in  the 
Territories?  The  Constitu- 
tion does  not  expressly  say. 

From  questions  of  this  class 
spring  all  our  constitutional 
controversies,  and    we    divide 

131 


upon  them  into  majorities  and 
minorities.  If  the  minority 
will  not  acquiesce,  the  majority 
must,  or  the  government  must 
cease.  There  is  no  other  alter- 
native ;  for  continuing  the  gov- 
ernment is  acquiescence  on  one 
side  or  the  otlier. 

If  a  minority  in   such  case 
will    secede    rather    than    ac- 
quiesce, they  make  a  precedent 
which   in  turn  will  divide  and 
ruin   them  ;    for  a  minority  of 
their  own  will  secede  from  them 
whenever  a  majority  refuses  to 
be  controlled  by  such  minority. 
For  instance,  why  may  not  any 
portion  of  a  new  confederacy  a 
year   or  two  hence   arbitrarily 
secede  again,  precisely  as  por- 
tions of  the  present  Union  now 
claim  to  secede  from  it?     All 
who   cherish     disunion     senti- 
ments are  now  being  educated 
to  the  exact  temper  of  doing 
this. 


132 


Is  there  such  perfect  identity 
of  interests  among  the  States  to 
compose  a  new  Union,  as  to 
produce  harmony  only,  and 
prevent  renewed  secession? 

Plainly,  the  central  idea  of 
secession  is  the  essence  of  an- 
archy. A  majority  held  in 
restraint  by  constitutional 
checks  and  limitations,  and 
always  changing  easily  with  de- 
liberate changes  of  popular 
opinions  and  sentiments,  is  the 
only  true  sovereign  of  a  free 
people.  Whoever  rejects  it 
does,  of  necessity,  fly  to  an- 
archy or  to  despotism.  Una- 
nimity is  impossible  ;  the  rule 
of  a  minority,  as  a  permanent 
arrangement,  is  wholly  inad- 
missible ;  so  that,  rejecting  the 
majority  principle,  anarchy  or 
despotism  in  some  form  is  all 
that  is'  left. 

I  do  not  forget  the  position, 
assumed  by  some,  that  consti- 

133 


tutional  questions  are  to  be  de- 
cided by  the  Supreme  Court; 
nor  do  I  deny  that  such  deci- 
sions must  be  binding,  in  any 
case,  upon  the  parties  to  a  suit, 
as  to  the   object  of  that  suit, 
while  they  are  also  entitled  to 
very  high  respect  and  consid- 
eration in  all  parallel  cases  by 
all   other   departments   of  the 
government.     And  while  it  is 
obviously    possible    that    such 
decision  may  be  erroneous  in 
any    given    case,  still   the   evil 
effect  following  it,  being  limited 
to  that  particular  case,  with  the 
chance  that  it  may  be  overruled 
and  never  become  a  precedent 
for  other   cases,  can  better  be 
borne  than  could  the  evils  of  a 
different     practice.        At     the 
same  time,  the   candid   citizen 
must  confess  that  if  the  policy 
of  the  government,  upon  vital 
questions   affecting  the  whole 
people,    is    to    be    irrevocably 

134 


fixed  by  decisions  of  the  Su- 
preme Court,  the  instant  they 
are  made,  in  ordinary  litigation 
between  parties  in  personal  ac- 
tions, the  people  will  have 
ceased  to  be  their  own  rulers, 
having  to  that  extent  practi- 
cally resigned  their  government 
into  the  hands  of  that  eminent 
tribunal.  Nor  is  there  in  this 
view  any  assault  upon  the  court 
or  the  judges.  It  is  a  duty 
from  which  they  may  not 
shrink  to  decide  cases  properly 
brought  before  them,  and  it  is 
no  fault  of  theirs  if  others  seek 
to  turn  their  decisions  to  polit- 
ical purposes. 

One  section  of  our  country 
believes  slavery  is  right,  and 
ought  to  be  extended,  while 
the  other  believes  it  is  wrong, 
and  ought  not  to  be  extended. 
This  is  the  only  substantial  dis- 
pute. The  fugitive-slave  clause 
of  the  Constitution,  and  the  law 

135 


for  the  suppression  of  the  for- 
eign   slave-trade,   are   each   as 
well  enforced,  perhaps,  as  any 
law  can  ever  be  in  a  community 
where  the  moral  sense  of  the 
people  imperfectly  supports  the 
law  itself.      The  great  body  of 
the   people    abide   by  the  dry 
legal  obligation  in  both  cases, 
and  a  few  break  over  in  each. 
This,  I    think,  cannot  be  per- 
fectly cured ;   and  it  would  be 
worse  in   both   cases  after  the 
separation  of  the  sections  than 
before.       The     foreign    slave- 
trade,     now     imperfectly    sup- 
pressed,   would    be    ultimately 
revived,  without  restriction,  in 
one     section,     while      fugitive 
slaves,  now  only  partially  sur- 
rendered, would  not  be  surren- 
dered at  all  by  the  other. 

Physically  speaking,  we  can- 
not separate.  We  cannot  re- 
move our  respective  sections 
from  each  other,  nor  build  an 


136 


impassable  wall  between  them. 
A  husband  and  wife  may  be 
divorced,  and  go  out  of  the 
presence  and  beyond  the  reach 
of  each  other  ;  but  the  different 
parts  of  our  country  cannot  do 
this.  They  cannot  but  remain 
face  to  face,  and  intercourse, 
either  amicable  or  hostile,  must 
continue  between  them.  Is  it 
possible,  then,  to  make  that  in- 
tercourse more  advantageous 
or  more  satisfactory  after  sepa- 
ration than  before  ?  Can  aliens 
make  treaties  easier  than  friends 
can  make  laws?  Can  treaties 
be  more  faithfully  enforced  be- 
tween aliens  than  laws  can 
among  friends?  Suppose  you 
go  to  war,  you  cannot  fight 
always ;  and  when,  after  much 
loss  on  both  sides,  and  no  gain 
on  either,  you  cease  fighting, 
the  identical  old  questions  as  to 
terms  of  intercourse  are  again 
upon  you. 

137 


This  country,  with  its  insti- 
tutions, belongs  to  the  people 
who  inhabit  it.   Whenever  they 
shall  grow  weary  of  the  exist- 
ing government,  they  can  exer- 
cise their  constitutional  right  of 
amending   it,  or  their   revolu- 
tionary right  to  dismember  or 
overthrow   it.       I     cannot    be 
ignorant  of  the  fact  that  many 
worthy   and    patriotic   citizens 
are  desirous  of  having  the  Na- 
tional   Constitution    amended. 
While  I  make  no  recommenda- 
tion  of    amendments,    I    fully 
recognize  the  rightful  authority 
of  the  people  over  the   whole 
subject,  to  be  exercised  in  either 
of  the  modes  prescribed  in  the 
instrument  itself;  and  I  should, 
under  existing   circumstances, 
favor  rather  than  oppose  a  fair 
opportunity  being  afforded  the 
people  to  act  upon  it.     I  will 
venture  to  add  that  to  me  the 
convention  mode  seems  prefer- 

138 


able,  in  that  it  allows  amend- 
ments to  originate  with  the  peo- 
ple themselves,  instead  of  only 
permitting  them  to  take  or  re- 
ject propositions  originated  by 
others  not  especially  chosen  for 
the  purpose,  and  which  might 
not  be  precisely  such  as  they 
would  wish  to  either  accept  or 
refuse.     I    understand   a  pro- 
posed amendment  to  the  Con- 
stitution—which    amendment, 
however,  I  have  not  seen— has 
passed  Congress,  to  the  effect 
that  the  Federal   Government 
shall  never  interfere  with  the 
domestic    institutions     of    the 
States,  including  that    of  per- 
sons held  to  service.     To  avoid 
misconstruction  of  what  I  have 
said,  I  depart  from  my  purpose 
not   to     speak     of     particular 
amendments    so  far  as  to  say 
that,  holding  such  a  provision 
to   now   be   implied    constitu- 
tional law,  I  have  no  objection 


139 


to  its  being  made  express  and 
irrevocable. 

The  chief  magistrate  derives 
all  his  authority  from  the  peo- 
ple, and   they  have  conferred 
none  upon  him  to  fix  terms  for 
the   separation    of   the   States. 
The  people  themselves  can  do 
this  also  if  they  choose  ;  but  the 
executive,  as  such,  has  nothing 
to  do  with  it.      His  duty  is  to 
administer  the  present  govern- 
ment, as  it  came  to  his'hands, 
and  to  transmit  it,  unimpaired 
by  him,  to  his  successor. 

Why  should  there  not  be  a 
patient  confidence  in  the  ulti- 
mate justice  of  the  people  ?     Is 
there  any  better  or  equal  hope 
in  the  world?      In  our  present 
differences,  is  either  party  with- 
out faith  of  being  in  the'right? 
If  the  Almighty  Ruler  of  Na- 
tions,   with    his    eternal    truth 
and  justice,  be  on  your  side  of 
the  North,  or  on  yours  of  the 

140 


South,  that  truth  and  that  jus- 
tice will  surely  prevail  by  the 
judgment  of  this  great  tribunal 
of  the  American  people. 

By  the  frame  of  the  govern- 
ment under  which  we  live,  this 
same  people  have  wisely  given 
their  public  servants  but  little 
power  for  mischief  ;  and  have, 
with  equal  wisdom,  provided 
for  the  return  of  that  little  to 
their  own  hands  at  verv  short 
intervals.  While  the  people 
retain  their  virtue  and  vigi- 
lance, no  administration,  by  any 
extreme  of  wickedness  or  follv, 
can  very  seriously  injure  the 
government  in  the  short  space 
of  four  years. 

My  countrymen,  one  and  all, 
think  calmly  and  well  upon  this 
whole  subject.  Nothing  valu- 
able can  be  lost  by  taking  time. 
If  there  be  an  object  to  hurry 
any  of  you  in  hot  haste  to  a 
step   which   you   would    never 

141 


take   deliberately,   that   object 
will     be    frustrated   by  taking 
time  ;   but  no  good  object  can 
be  frustrated   by  it.     Such   of 
you  as  are  now  dissatisfied  still 
have  the  old  Constitution  un- 
impaired, and,  on  the  sensitive 
point,    the    laws   of  your  own 
framing  under  it ;  while  the  new 
administration     will    have    no 
immediate    power,  if  it  would, 
to  change    either.      If  it  were 
admitted  that  you  who  are  dis- 
satisfied hold  the  right  side  in 
the    dispute,    there    still  is  no 
single  good  reason  for  precipi- 
tate action.      Intelligence,  pa- 
triotism, Christianity,  and  a  firm 
reliance  on  Him  who  has  never 
yet  forsaken  this  favored  land, 
are  still  competent  to  adjust  in 
the   best    way  all  our   present 
difficulty. 

In  your  hands,  my  dissatisfied 
fellow-countrymen,  and  not  in 
mine,  is  the   momentous  issue 

142 


of  civil  war.  The  government 
will  not  assail  you.  You  can 
have  no  conflict  without  being 
yourselves  the  aggressors. 
You  have  no  oath  registered  in 
heaven  to  destroy  the  govern- 
ment, while  I  shall  have  the 
most  solemn  one  to  "pre- 
serve, protect,  and  defend  it." 
I  am  loath  to  close.  We  are 
not  enemies,  but  friends.  We 
must  not  be  enemies.  Though 
passion  may  have  strained,  it 
must  not  break  our  bonds  of 
affection.  The  mystic  chords 
of  memory,  stretching  from 
every  battle-field  and  patriot 
grave  to  every  living  heart  and 
hearthstone  all  over  this  broad 
land,  will  yet  swell  the  chorus 
of  the  Union  when  again 
touched,  as  surely  they  will  be, 
by  the  better  angels  of  our 
nature. 


143 


XXIV 

LETTER  TO   HORACE  GREELEY 
August  22,  1862. 

Dear  Sir:  I  have  just  read 
yours  of  the  19th  addressed  to 
myself  through  the  New  York 
"tribune."  If  there  be  in  it 
any  statements  or  assumptions 
of  fact  which  I  mav  know  to 
be  erroneous,  I  do  not,  now 
and  here,  controvert  them.  If 
there  be  in  it  any  inferences 
which  I  may  believe  to  be 
falsely  drawn,  I  do  not,  now 
and  here,  argue  against  them. 
If  there  be  perceptible  in  it  an 
impatient  and  dictatorial  tone, 
I  waive  it  in  deference  to  an 
old  friend  whose  heart  I  have 
always  supposed  to  be  right. 
As  to  the  policy  I  "seem  to 

144 


be  pursuing,"  as  you  say,  I  have 
not  meant  to  leave  any  one  in 
doubt. 

I  would  save  the  Union.  I 
would  save  it  the  shortest  way 
under  the  Constitution.  The 
sooner  the  national  authority 
can  be  restored,  the  nearer  the 
Union  will  be  "the  Union  as 
it  was."  If  there  be  those  who 
would  not  save  the  Union  un- 
less they  could  at  the  same 
time  save  slavery,  I  do  not 
agree  with  them.  If  there  be 
those  who  would  not  save  the 
Union  unless  thev  could  at  the 

J 

same  time  destroy  slavery,  I  do 
not  agree  with  them.  .  My 
paramount  object  in  this  strug- 
gle is  to  save  the  Union,  and  is 
not  either  to  save  or  to  destroy 
slavery.  If  I  could  save  the 
Union  without  freeing  any 
slave,  I  would  do  it ;  and  if  I 
could  save  it  by  freeing  all  the 
slaves,  I  would  do  it ;  and  if  I 

10  145 


could  save  it  by  freeing  some 
and  leaving  others  alone,  I 
would  also  do  that.  What  I  do 
about  slavery  and  the  colored 
race,  I  do  because  I  believe  it 
helps  to  save  the  Union ;  and 
what  I  forbear,  I  forbear  be- 
cause I  do  not  believe  it  would 
help  to  save  the  Union.  I 
shall  do  less  whenever  I  shall 
believe  what  I  am  doing  hurts 
the  cause,  and  I  shall  do  more 
whenever  I  shall  believe  doing 
more  will  help  the  cause.  I 
shall  try  to  correct  errors  when 
shown  to  be  errors,  and  I  shall 
adopt  new  views  so  fast  as  they 
shall  appear  to  be  true  views. 

I  have  here  stated  my  pur- 
pose according  to  my  view  of 
official  duty ;  and  I  intend  no 
modification  of  my  oft-ex- 
pressed personal  wish  that  all 
men  evervwhere  could  be  free. 
Yours, 

A.  Lincoln. 

14o 


XXV 

DEPENDENCE   UPON    GOD 

Reply    to    an    address    by    Mrs.     Gurney, 
September  [28?],  1862. 

I  am  glad  of  this  interview,  and 
glad  to  know  that  I  have  your 
sympathy  and  prayers. 

We  are  indeed  going  through 
a  great  trial — a  fiery  trial.  In 
the  very  responsible  position  in 
which  I  happen  to  be  placed, 
being  a  humble  instrument  in 
the  hands  of  our  heavenly 
Father,  as  I  am,  and  as  we  all 
are,  to  work  out  his  great  pur- 
poses, I  have  desired  that  all 
my  works  and  acts  may  be  ac- 
cording to  his  will,  and  that  it 
might  be  so,  I  have  sought  his 
aid ;  but  if,  after  endeavoring 

147 


to  do  my  best  in  the  light  which 
he  affords  me,  I  find  my  efforts 
fail,  I  must  believe  that,  for 
some  purpose  unknown  to  me, 
he  wills  it  otherwise. 

If  I  had  had  my  way,  this 
war  would  never  have  been 
commenced.  If  I  had  been 
allowed  my  way,  this  war  would 
have  been  ended  before  this; 
but  we  find  it  still  continues, 
and  we  must  believe  that  he 
permits  it  for  some  wise  pur- 
pose of  his  own,  mysterious  and 
unknown  to  us ;  and  though 
with  our  limited  understand- 
ings we  may  not  be  able  to 
comprehend  it,  yet  we  cannot 
but  believe  that  he  who  made 
the  world  still  governs  it. 


148 


XXVI 

MEDITATION    ON    THE 
DIVINE    WILL 

September  [30?],  1862. 

The  will  of  God  prevails.  In 
great  contests  each  party 
claims  to  act  in  accordance 
with  the  will  of  God.  Both 
may  be,  and  one  must  be, 
wrong.  God  cannot  be  for 
and  against  the  same  thing  at 
the  same  time. 

In  the  present  civil  war  it  is 
quite  possible  that  God's  pur- 
pose is  something  different  from 
the  purpose  of  either  party; 
and  yet  the  human  instrumen- 
talities, working  just  as  they 
do,  are  of  the  best  adaptation 
to   effect  his   purpose.     I   am 

14S 


almost  ready  to  say  that  this  is 
probably  true  ;  that  God  wills 
this  contest,  and  wills  that  it 
shall  not  end  vet.  Bv  his 
mere  great  power  on  the  minds 
of  the  now  contestants,  he 
could  have  either  saved  or 
destroyed  the  Union  without 
a  human  contest.  Yet  the  con- 
test began.  And,  having  be- 
gun, he  could  give  the  final 
victory  to  either  side  any  day. 
Yet  the  contest  proceeds. 


150 


XXVII 

LETTER    TO   GENERAL 
McCLELLAN 

October  13,  1862. 

My  dear  Sir :  You  remember 
my  speaking  to  you  of  what  I 
called  your  over-cautiousness. 
Are  you  not  over-cautious 
when  you  assume  that  you  can- 
not do  what  the  enemy  is  con- 
stantly doing?  Should  you 
not  claim  to  be  at  least  his. 
equal  in  prowess,  and  act  upon 
the  claim? 

As  I  understand,  you  tele- 
graphed General  Halleck  that 
you  cannot  subsist  your  army 
at  Winchester  unless  the  rail- 
road from  Harper's  Ferry  to 
that   point  be  put  in  working 

151 


order.  But  the  enemy  does 
now  subsist  his  army  at  Win- 
chester, at  a  distance  nearly 
twice  as  great  from  railroad 
transportation  as  you  would 
have  to  do  without  the  railroad 
last  named.  He  now  wagons 
from  Culpeper  Court  House, 
which  is  just  about  twice  as 
far  as  you  would  have  to  do 
from  Harper's  Ferry.  He  is 
certainly  not  more  than  half 
as  well  provided  with  wagons 
as  you  are. 

I  certainly  should  be  pleased 
for  you  to  have  the  advantage 
of  the  railroad  from  Harper's 
Ferry  to  Winchester,  but  it 
wastes  all  the  remainder  of 
autumn  to  give  it  to  you,  and 
in  fact  ignores  the  question  of 
time,  which  cannot  and  must 
not  be  ignored. 

Again,  one  of  the  standard 
maxims  of  war,  as  you  know, 
is  to  "  operate  upon  the  enemy's 

152 


communications  as  much  as 
possible  without  exposing  your 
own."  You  seem  to  act  as  if 
this  applies  against  you,  but 
cannot  apply  in  your  favor. 
Change  positions  with  the 
enemy,  and  think  you  not  he 
would  break  your  communica- 
tion with  Richmond  within  the 
next  twenty-four  hours? 

You  dread  his  going  into 
Pennsylvania ;  but  if  he  does 
so  in  full  force,  he  gives  up  his 
communications  to  you  abso- 
lutely, and  you  have  nothing  to 
do  but  to  follow  and  ruin  him. 
If  he  does  so  with  less  than 
full  force,  fall  upon  and  beat 
what  is  left  behind  all  the  easier. 
Exclusive  of  the  water-line,  you 
are  now  nearer  Richmond  than 
the  enemy  is  by  the  route  that 
you  can  and  he  must  take. 
Why  can  you  not  reach  there 
before  him,  unless  you  admit 
that    he    is     more    than    your 

153 


equal  on  a  march?  His  route 
is  the  arc  of  a  circle,  while 
yours  is  the  chord.  The  roads 
are  as  good  on  yours  as  on  his. 
You  know  I  desired,  but  did  not 
order,  you  to  cross  the  Potomac 
below,  instead  of  above,  the 
Shenandoah  and  Blue  Ridge. 
My  idea  was  that  this  would  at 
once  menace  the  enemy's  com- 
munications, which  I  would 
seize  if  he  would  permit. 

If  he  should  move  north- 
ward, I  would  follow  him 
closely,  holding  his  communi- 
cations. If  he  should  prevent 
our  seizing  his  communications 
and  move  toward  Richmond, 
I  would  press  closely  to  him, 
fight  him  if  a  favorable  oppor- 
tunity should  present,  and  at 
least  try  to  beat  him  to  Rich- 
mond on  the  inside  track.  I  say 
"  try  "  ;  if  we  never  try,  we  shall 
never  succeed.  If  he  makes  a 
stand    at   Winchester,  moving 

154 


neither  north  nor  south,  I  would 
fight  him  there,  on  the  idea  that 
if  we  cannot  beat  him  when  he 
bears  the  wastage  of  coming  to 
us,  we  never  can  when  we  bear 
the  wastage  of  going  to  him. 

This  proposition  is  a  simple 
truth,  and  is  too  important  to 
be  lost  sight  of  for  a  moment. 
In  coming  to  us  he  tenders  us 
an  advantage  which  we  should 
not  waive.  We  should  not  so 
operate  as  to  merely  drive  him 
away.  As  we  must  beat  him 
somewhere  or  fail  finally,  we 
can  do  it,  if  at  all,  easier  near 
to  us  than  far  away.  If  we 
cannot  beat  the  enemy  where 
he  now  is,  we  never  can,  he 
again  being  within  theintrench- 
ments  of  Richmond. 

Recurring  to  the  idea  of 
going  to  Richmond  on  the  in- 
side track,  the  facility  of  sup- 
plying from  the  side  away  from 
the  enemy  is  remarkable,  as  it 

155 


were,  by  the  different  spokes  of 
a  wheel  extending  from  the  hub 
toward  the  rim,  and  this  whether 
you  move  directly  by  the  chord 
or  on  the  inside  arc,  hugging 
the  Blue  Ridge  more  closely. 
The  chord-line,  as  you  see,  car- 
ries you  by  Aldie,  Haymarket, 
and  Fredericksburg;  and  you 
see  how  turnpikes,  railroads, 
and  finally  the  Potomac,  by 
Aquia  Creek,  meet  you  at  all 
points  from  Washington ;  the 
same,  only  the  lines  lengthened 
a  little,  if  you  press  closer  to 
the  Blue  Ridge  part  of  the  way. 
The  gaps  through  the  Blue 
Ridge  I  understand  to  be  about 
the  following  distances  from 
Harper's  Ferry,  to  wit :  Ves- 
tal's, 5  miles;  Gregory's,  13; 
Snicker's,  18;  Ashby's,  28; 
Manassas,  38  ;  Chester,45  ;  and 
Thornton's,  53.  I  should 
think  it  preferable  to  take  the 
route  nearest  the  enemy,  dis- 

156 


abling  him  to  make  an  im- 
portant move  without  your 
knowledge,  and  compelling 
him  to  keep  his  forces  together 
for  dread  of  you.  The  gaps 
would  enable  you  to  attack  if 
you  should  wish.  For  a  great 
part  of  the  way  you  would  be 
practically  between  the  enemy 
and  both  Washington  and 
Richmond,  enabling  us  to  spare 
you  the  greatest  number  of 
troops  from  here.  When  at 
length  running  for  Richmond 
ahead  of  him  enables  him  to 
move  this  way,  if  he  does  so, 
turn  and  attack  him  in  rear. 
But  I  think  he  should  be  en- 
gaged long  before  such  point 
is  reached.  It  is  all  easy  if  our 
troops  march  as  well  as  the 
enemy,  and  it  is  unmanly  to 
say  they  cannot  do  it.  This 
letter  is  in  no  sense  an  order. 
Yours  truly, 

A.  Lincoln. 

157 


XXVIII 

TELEGRAM     TO    GENERAL 
McCLELLAN 

October  24  [25?],  1862. 

I  have  just  read  your  despatch 
about  sore-tongued  and  fa- 
tigued horses.  Will  you  par- 
don me  for  asking  what  the 
horses  of  your  army  have  done 
since  the  battle  of  Antietam 
that  fatigues  anything  ? 

A.  Lincoln. 


158 


XXIX 

EMANCIPATION  PROCLAMA- 
TION 

January  i,  1863. 

Whereas,  on  the  twenty-sec- 
ond day  of  September,  in  the 
year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  sixty-two,  a 
proclamation  was  issued  by 
the  President  of  the  United 
States,  containing,  among 
other  things,  the  following,  to 
wit: 

"  That  on  the  first  day  of 
January,  in  the  year  of  our 
Lord  one  thousand  eight  hun- 
dred and  sixty-three,  all  per- 
sons held  as  slaves  within  any 
State,  or  designated  part  of  a 

159 


State,  the  people  whereof  shall 
then  be  in  rebellion  against  the 
United  States,   shall   be   then, 
thenceforward,      and     forever 
free ;  and  the  Executive  Gov- 
ernment of  the   United  States, 
including  the  military  and  naval 
authority   thereof,    will   recog- 
nize and  maintain  the  freedom 
of  such  persons,  and  will  do  no 
act  or  acts  to  repress  such  per- 
sons, or  any  of   them,  in  any 
efforts  they  may  make  for  their 
actual  freedom. 

'  That  the  Executive  will,  on 
the  first  day  of  January  afore- 
said,  by    proclamation,   desig- 
nate  the   States   and   parts  of 
States,  if  any,  in  which  the  peo- 
ple  thereof   respectively  shall 
then  be  in  rebellion  against  the 
United   States;    and   the    fact 
that  any  State,   or  the  people 
thereof,  shall  on  that  day  be  in 
good  faith  represented  in   the 
Congress  of  the  United  States 


160 


by  members  chosen  thereto  at 
elections  wherein  a  majority  of 
the  qualified  voters  of  such 
State  shall  have  participated, 
shall  in  the  absence  of  strong 
countervailing  testimony  be 
deemed  conclusive  evidence 
that  such  State  and  the  people 
thereof  are  not  then  in  rebel- 
lion against  the  United  States." 

Now,    therefore,    I,    Abraham 
Lincoln,      President      of      the 
United  States,  by  virtue  of  the 
power  in   me    vested   as   com- 
mander-in-chief of  the  army  and 
navy  of  the   United  States,  in 
time  of  actual  armed  rebellion 
against  the  authority  and  gov- 
ernment of  the  United  States, 
and  as  a  fit  and  necessary  war 
measure   for   suppressing    said 
rebellion,  do,  on  this  first  day 
of  January,  in  the  year  of  our 
Lord  one  thousand  eight  hun- 
dred   and   sixty-three,   and   in 

11  161 


accordance   with  my  purpose 
so   to  do,  publicly  proclaimed 
for    the    full    period    of    IOO 
days  from  the  day  first  above 
mentioned,    order   and    desk 
nate  as   the   States  and  parts 
oi   States   wherein   the  people 
thereof,    respectively,  are   this 
day  in    rebellion    against    the 
United   States,   the   following 
to  wit :  6' 

Arkansas,  Texas,  Louisiana 
(except    the    parishes     of    St 
Bernard,   Plaquemines,  Jeffer- 
son, St.  John,  St.  Charles,  St 
James,  Ascension,  Assumption, 
1  errebonne,     Lafourche,     St 
Mary,  St.  Martin,  and  Orleans, 
including  the  city  of  New  Or- 
terns),    Mississippi,    Alabama, 
Florida,  Georgia,  South  Caro- 
lina, North  Carolina,  and  Vir- 
ginia   (except    the    forty-ei^ht 
counties    designated    as    West 
Virginia,  and  also  the  counties 
of  Berkeley,  Accomac,  North- 


162 


ampton,  Elizabeth  City,  York, 
Princess  Anne,  and  Norfolk, 
including  the  cities  of  Norfolk 
and  Portsmouth),  and  which 
excepted  parts  are  for  the  pres- 
ent left  precisely  as  if  this  proc- 
lamation were  not  issued. 

And  by  virtue  of  the  power 
and  for  the  purpose  aforesaid, 
I  do  order  and  declare  that  all 
persons  held  as  slaves  within 
said  designated  States  and  parts 
of  States  are,  and  hencefor- 
ward shall  be,  free ;  and  that 
the  Executive  Government  of 
the  United  States,  including 
the  military  and  naval  authori- 
ties thereof,  will  recognize  and 
maintain  the  freedom  of  said 
persons. 

And  I  hereby  enjoin  upon 
the  people  so  declared  to  be 
free  to  abstain  from  all  violence, 
unless  in  necessary  self-de- 
fense ;  and  I  recommend  to 
them  that,  in  all   cases   when 

163 


allowed,  they  labor  faithfully 
for  reasonable  wages. 

And    I  further  declare  and 
make  known  that  such  persons 
of  suitable   condition   will    be 
received  into  the  armed  service 
of  the  United  States  to  garrison 
forts,   positions,   stations,    and 
other  places,  and  to  man  ves- 
sels of  all  sorts  in  said  service. 
And  upon  this  act,  sincerely 
believed  to  be  an  act  of  justice, 
warranted  by  the  Constitution 
upon  military   necessity,  I   in- 
voke the  considerate  judgment 
of  mankind  and  the   gracious 
favor  of  Almighty  God. 

In  witness  whereof,  I  have 
hereunto  set  my  hand,  and 
caused  the  seal  of  the  United 
States  to  be  affixed. 

Done  at  the  city  of 

Washington,    this    first 

day  of  January,  in  the 

year  of    our  Lord  one 

[l.  s.]   thousand  eight  hundred 

164 


and  sixty-three,  and  of 
the  independence  of  the 
United  States  of  Amer- 
ica the  eighty-seventh. 

Abraham  Lincoln. 
By  the  President : 
William  H.  Seward, 

Secretary  of  State. 


165 


XXX 

LETTER  TO   THE  WORKING-MEN 
OF    MANCHESTER,    ENGLAND 

January  19,  1863. 

To  the  Working-men  of  Man- 
Chester:  I  have  the  honor  to 
acknowledge  the  receipt  of  the 
address  and  resolutions  which 
you  sent  me  on  the  eve  of  the 
new  year. 

When  I  came,  on  the  4th  of 
March,  1 86 1 ,  through  a  free  and 
constitutional  election  to  pre- 
side in  the  government  of  the 
United  States,  the  country  was 
found  at  the  verge  of  civil  war. 
Whatever  might  have  been  the 
cause,  or  whosesoever  the  fault, 
one  duty,  paramount  to  all 
others,  was  before  me,  namely, 

166 


to  maintain  and  preserve  at 
once  the  Constitution  and  the 
integrity  of  the  Federal  Repub- 
lic. A  conscientious  purpose 
to  perform  this  duty  is  the  key 
to  all  the  measures  of  adminis- 
tration which  have  been  and  to 
all  which  will  hereafter  be  pur- 
sued. Under  our  frame  of 
government  and  my  official 
oath,  I  could  not  depart  from 
this  purpose  if  I  would.  It  is 
not  always  in  the  power  of 
governments  to  enlarge  or  re- 
strict the  scope  of  moral  results 
which  follow  the  policies  that 
they  may  deem  it  necessary  for 
the  public  safety  from  time  to 
time  to  adopt. 

I  have  understood  well  that 
the  duty  of  self-preservation 
rests  solely  with  the  American 
people  ;  but  I  have  at  the  same 
time  been  aware  that  favor  or 
disfavor  of  foreign  nations 
might     have    a    material     in- 

167 


fluence  in  enlarging  or  prolong- 
mg  the  struggle  with  disloyal 
men  in  which  the  country  is 
engaged. 

A  fair  examination  of  history 
has  served  to  authorize  a  belief 
that  the  past  actions  and  influ- 
ences of  the  United  States  were 
generally   regarded   as   having 
been   beneficial    toward    man- 
kind.    I  have,  therefore,  reck- 
oned upon    the  forbearance  of 
nations.         Circumstances— to 
some  of  which  you  kindly  al- 
lude—induce  me  especially  to 
expect  that  if  justice  and  good 
faith  should  be  practised  by  the 
United  States,  thev  would  en- 
counter no  hostile  influence  on 
the  part  of    Great  Britain.     It 
is  now   a  pleasant  duty  to  ac- 
knowledge   the   demonstration 
you  have  given   of  your  desire 
that  a  spirit  of  amity  and  peace 
toward    this  country  may  pre- 
vail  in    the   councils   of   your 

168 


Queen,  who  is  respected  and  es- 
teemed in  your  own  country 
only  more  than  she  is  by  the 
kindred  nation  which  has  its 
home  on  this  side  of  the  Atlan- 
tic. 

I  know  and  deeply  deplore 
the  sufferings  which  the  work- 
ing-men at  Manchester,  and  in 
all  Europe,  are  called  to  endure 
in  this  crisis.     It  has  been  often 
and  studiously  represented  that 
the   attempt  to  overthrow  this 
government,    which    was  built 
upon  the  foundation  of  human 
rights,  and  to  substitute  for  it 
one   which   should  rest  exclu- 
sively on  the  basis  of  human 
slavery,    was   likely    to   obtain 
the  favor  of  Europe.     Through 
the  action  of  our  disloyal  citi- 
zens,    the     working-men      of 
Europe   have   been    subjected 
to  severe  trials,  for  the  purpose 
of    forcing    their    sanction    to 
that  attempt.     Under  the  cir 

169 


cumstances,  I  cannot  but  re- 
gard your  decisive  utterances 
upon  the  question  as  an  in- 
stance of  sublime  Christian 
heroism  which  has  not  been 
surpassed  in  any  age  or  in  any 
country. 

It  is  indeed  an  energetic  and 
reinspiring    assurance    of    the 
inherent  power  of   truth,  and 
of  the  ultimate   and   universal 
triumph    of  justice,  humanity, 
and  freedom.      I  do  not  doubt 
that  the  sentiments  you  have 
expressed  will  be  sustained  by 
your  great  nation  ,  and,  on  the 
other  hand,  I  have  no  hesita- 
tion in  assuring  you  that  they 
will  excite  admiration,  esteem, 
and  the  most  reciprocal  feel- 
ings of  friendship  among  the 
American  people.     I  hail  this 
interchange  of  sentiment,  there- 
fore, as  an  augury  that  what- 
ever else  may  happen,  whatever 
misfortune     may    befall     your 

170 


country  or  my  own,  the  peace 
and  friendship  which  now  exist 
between  the  two  nations  will 
be,  as  it  shall  be  my  desire  to 
make  them,  perpetual. 

Abraham  Lincoln. 


m 


XXXI 

LETTER    TO    GENERAL 
HOOKER 

January  26,  1863. 

General :  I  have  placed  you  at 
the  head  of  the  Army  of  the 
Potomac.  Of  course  I  have 
done  this  upon  what  appear  to 
me  to  be  sufficient  reasons,  and 
yet  I  think  it  best  for  you  to 
know  that  there  are  some  things 
in  regard  to  which  I  am  not 
quite  satisfied  with  you. 

I  believe  you  to  be  a  brave 
and  skilful  soldier,  which  of 
course  I  like.  I  also  believe 
you  do  not  mix  politics  with 
your  profession,  in  which  you 
are  right.  You  have  confi- 
dence in  yourself,  which  is  a 

17J 


valuable  if  not  an  indispensa- 
ble quality.  You  are  ambitious, 
which,  within  reasonable 
bounds,  does  good  rather  than 
harm ;  but  I  think  that  during 
General  Burnside's  command 
of  the  army  you  have  taken 
counsel  of  your  ambition  and 
thwarted  him  as  much  as  you 
could,  in  which  you  did  a  great 
wrong  to  the  country  and  to  a 
most  meritorious  and  honorable 
brother  officer. 

I  have  heard,  in  such  a  way 
as  to  believe  it,  of  your  re- 
cently saying  that  both  the  army 
and  the  government  needed  a 
dictator.  Of  course  it  was  not 
for  this,  but  in  spite  of  it,  that 
I  have  given  you  the  command. 
Only  those  generals  who  gain 
successes  can  set  up  dictators. 
What  I  now  ask  of  you  is 
military  success,  and  I  will  risk 
the  dictatorship.  The  govern- 
ment will  support  you  to   the 

173 


utmost  of  its  ability,  which  is 
neither  more  nor  less  than  it 
has  done  and  will  do  for  all 
commanders. 

I  much  fear  that  the  spirit 
which  you  have  aided  to  infuse 
into  the  army,  of  criticizing 
their  commander  and  with- 
holding confidence  from  him, 
will  now  turn  upon  you.  I 
shall  assist  you  as  far  as  I  can 
to  put  it  down.  Neither  you 
nor  Napoleon,  if  he  were  alive 
again,  could  get  any  good  out 
of  an  army  while  such  a  spirit 
prevails  in  it. 

And  now  beware  of  rashness. 
Beware  of  rashness,  but  with 
energy  and  sleepless  vigilance 
go  forward  and  give  us  vic- 
tories.    Yours  very  truly, 

A.  Lincoln. 


174 


XXXII 

LETTER    TO    GENERAL    GRANT 

July  13,  1863. 

My  dear  General :  I  do  not  re- 
member that  you  and  I  ever 
met  personally.  I  write  this  now 
as  a  grateful  acknowledgment 
for  the  almost  inestimable  ser- 
vice you  have  done  the  coun- 
try. I  wish  to  say  a  word 
further.  When  you  first 
reached  the  vicinity  of  Vicks- 
burg,  I  thought  you  should  do 
what  you  finally  did— march 
the  troops  across  the  neck,  run 
the  batteries  with  the  transports, 
and  thus  go  below;  and  I 
never  had  any  faith,  except  a 
general  hope  that  you  knew 
better  than  I,  that  the   Yazoo 

175 


Pass  expedition  and  the  like 
could  succeed.  When  you  got 
below  and  took  Port  Gibson, 
Grand  Gulf,  and  vicinity,  I 
thought  you  should  go  down 
the  river  and  join  General 
Banks,  and  when  you  turned 
northward,  east  of  the  Big 
Black,  I  feared  it  was  a  mis- 
take. I  now  wish  to  make  the 
personal  acknowledgment  that 
you  were  right  and  I  was 
wrong.  Yours  very  truly, 
A.  Lincoln. 


176 


XXXIII 

LETTER    TO    J.    C.    CONKLING 

August  26,  1863. 

My  dear  Sir:  Your  letter 
inviting  me  to  attend  a  mass- 
meeting  of  unconditional 
Union  men,  to  be  held  at  the 
capital  of  Illinois  on  the  third 
day  of  September,  has  been  re- 
ceived. It  would  be  very 
agreeable  to  me  to  thus  meet 
my  old  friends  at  my  own 
home,  but  I  cannot  just  now 
be  absent  from  here  so  long  as 
a  visit  there  would  require. 

The  meeting  is  to  be  of  all 
those  who  maintain  uncondi- 
tional devotion  to  the  Union ; 
and  I  am  sure  my  old  political 
friends  will  thank  me  for  ten- 


12 


177 


dering,  as  I  do,  the  nation's 
gratitude  to  those  and  other 
noble  men  whom  no  partizan 
malice  or  partizan  hope  can 
make  false  to  the  nation's  life. 
There  are  those  who  are 
dissatisfied  with  me.  To  such 
I  would  say  :  You  desire  peace, 
and  you  blame  me  that  we  do 
not  have  it.  But  how  can  we 
attain  it?  There  are  but  three 
conceivable  ways :  First,  to 
suppress  the  rebellion  by  force 
of  arms.  This  I  am  trying  to 
do.  Are  you  for  it?  If  you 
are,  so  far  we  are  agreed.  If 
you  are  not  for  it,  a  second  way 
is  to  give  up  the  Union.  I  am 
against  this.  Are  you  for  it? 
If  you  are,  you  should  say  so 
plainly.  If  you  are  not  for 
force,  nor  yet  for  dissolution, 
there  only  remains  some  imag- 
inable compromise.  I  do  not 
believe  any  compromise  em- 
bracing the  maintenance  of  the 

178 


Union  is  now  possible.  All  I 
learn  leads  to  a  directly  oppo- 
site belief.  The  strength  of  the 
rebellion  is  its  military,  its  army. 
That  army  dominates  all  the 
country  and  all  the  people 
within  its  range.  Any  offer  of 
terms  made  by  any  man  or 
men  within  that  range,  in  op- 
position to  that  army,  is  simply 
nothing  for  the  present,  because 
such  man  or  men  have  no 
power  whatever  to  enforce  their 
side  of  a  compromise,  if  one 
were  made  with  them. 

To  illustrate  :  Suppose  refu- 
gees from  the  South  and  peace 
men  of  the  North  get  together 
in  convention,  and  frame  and 
proclaim  a  compromise  em- 
bracing a  restoration  of  the 
Union.  In  what  way  can  that 
compromise  be  used  to  keep 
Lee's  army  out  of  Pennsyl- 
vania? Meade's  army  can  keep 
Lee's    army    out    of    Pennsyl- 

179 


vania,  and,  I  think,  can  ulti- 
mately drive  it  out  of  existence. 
But  no  paper  compromise  to 
which  the  controllers  of  Lee's 
army  are  not  agreed  can  at  all 
affect  that  army.  In  an  effort 
at  such  compromise  we  should 
waste  time  which  the  enemy 
would  improve  to  our  disad- 
vantage ;  and  that  would  be 
all.  A  compromise,  to  be 
effective,  must  be  made  either 
with  those  who  control  the 
rebel  army,  or  with  the  people 
first  liberated  from  the  domina- 
tion of  that  army  by  the  success 
of  our  own  army.  Now,  allow 
me  to  assure  you  that  no  word 
or  intimation  from  that  rebel 
army,  or  from  any  of  the  men 
controlling  it.  in  relation  to  any 
peace  compromise,  has  ever 
come  to  my  knowledge  or  be- 
lief. All  charges  and  insinua- 
tions to  the  contrary  are  de- 
ceptive  and  groundless.     And 

180 


I  promise  you  that  if  any  such 
proposition  shall  hereafter 
come,  it  shall  not  be  rejected 
and  kept  a  secret  from  you.  I 
freely  acknowledge  myself  the 
servant  of  the  people/  accord- 
ing to  the  bond  of  service,— 
the  United  States  Constitution, 
—  and  that,  as  such,  I  am  re- 
sponsible to  them. 

But  to  be  plain.  You  are 
dissatisfied  with  me  about  the 
negro.  Quite  likely  there  is  a 
difference  of  opinion  between 
you  and  myself  upon  that  sub- 
ject. I  certainly  wish  that  all 
men  could  be  'free,  while  I 
suppose  you  do  not.  Yet  I 
have  neither  adopted  nor  pro- 
posed any  measure  which  is 
not  consistent  with  even  your 
view,  provided  you  are  for  the 
Union.  I  suggested  compen- 
sated emancipation,  to  which 
you  replied  you  wished  not  to 
be  taxed  to  buy  negroes.     But 


183 


I  had  not  asked  you  to  be  taxed 
to  buy  negroes,  except  in  such 
way  as  to  save  you  from  greater 
taxation  to  save  the  Union  ex- 
clusively by  other  means. 

You  dislike  the  emancipation 
proclamation,  and  perhaps 
would  have  it  retracted.  You 
say  it  is  unconstitutional.  I 
think  differently.  I  think  the 
Constitution  invests  its  com- 
mander-in-chief with  the  law 
of  war  in  time  of  war.  The 
most  that  can  be  said — if  so 
much — is  that  slaves  are  prop- 
erty. Is  there — has  there  ever 
been — any  question  that  by  the 
law  of  war  property,  both  of 
enemies  and  friends,  may  be 
taken  when  needed?  And  is 
it  not  needed  whenever  taking 
it  helps  us,  or  hurts  the  enemy? 
Armies,  the  world  over,  destroy 
enemies'  property  when  they 
cannot  use  it ;  and  even  de- 
stroy their  own  to  keep  it  from 

182 


the  enemy.  Civilized  belliger- 
ents do  all  in  their  power  to 
help  themselves  or  hurt  the 
enemy,  except  a  few  things  re- 
garded as  barbarous  or  cruel. 
Among  the  exceptions  are  the 
massacre  of  vanquished  foes 
and  non-combatants,  male  and 
female. 

But  the  proclamation,  as  law, 
either  is  valid  or  is  not  valid. 
If  it  is  not  valid,  it  needs  no  re- 
traction. If  it  is  valid,  it  cannot 
be  retracted  any  more  than  the 
dead  can  be  brought  to  life. 
Some  of  you  profess  to  think 
its  retraction  would  operate  fa- 
vorably for  the  Union.  Why 
better  after  the  retraction  than 
before  the  issue?  There  was 
more  than  a  year  and  a  half  of 
trial  to  suppress  the  rebellion 
before  the  proclamation  issued  ; 
the  last  one  hundred  davs  of 
which  passed  under  an  explicit 
notice  that  it  was  coming,  un- 

183 


less  averted  by  those  in  revolt 
returning  to  their  allegiance. 
The  war  has  certainly  pro- 
gressed as  favorably  for  us 
since  the  issue  of  the  procla- 
mation as  before. 

I  know,  as  fully  as  one  can 
know  the  opinions  of  others, 
that  some  of  the  commanders 
of  our  armies  in  the  field,  who 
have  given  us  our  most  im- 
portant successes,  believe  the 
emancipation  policy  and  the 
use  of  the  colored  troops  con- 
stitute the  heaviest  blow  yet 
dealt  to  the  rebellion,  and  that 
at  least  one  of  these  important 
successes  could  not  have  been 
achieved  when  it  was  but  for 
the  aid  of  black  soldiers. 
Among  the  commanders  hold- 
ing these  views  are  some  who 
have  never  had  any  affinity 
with  what  is  called  abolition- 
ism, or  with  Republican  party 
politics,    but    who   hold    them 

184 


purely  as  military  opinions.  I 
submit  these  opinions  as  being 
entitled  to  some  weight  against 
the  objections  often  urged  that 
emancipation  and  arming  the 
blacks  are  unwise  as  military 
measures,  and  were  not  adopted 
as  such  in  good  faith. 

You  say  you  will  not  fight  to 
free  negroes.  Some  of  them 
seem  willing  to  fight  for  you  ; 
but  no  matter.  Fight  you, 
then,  exclusively,  to  save  the 
Union.  I  issued  the  proclama- 
tion on  purpose  to  aid  you  in 
saving  the  Union.  Whenever 
you  shall  have  conquered  all 
resistance  to  the  Union,  if  I 
shall  urge  you  to '  continue 
fighting,  it  will  be  an  apt  time 
then  for  you  to  declare  you 
will  not  fight  to  free  negroes. 

I  thought  that  in  your  strug- 
gle for  the  Union,  to  whatever 
extent  the  negroes  should  cease 
helping  the  enemy,  to  that  ex- 

185 


tent  it  weakened  the  enemy  in 

his  resistance  to  you.     Do  you 

think   differently?     I    thought 

that  whatever  negroes  can  be 

got  to  do  as  soldiers  leaves  just 

so  much  less  for  white  soldiers 

to   do    in  saving    the    Union. 

Does  it    appear  otherwise   to 

you?     But  negroes,  like  other 

people,     act     upon     motives. 

Why  should  they  do  anything 

for  us  if  we  will  do  nothing  for 

them?       If    they    stake    their 

lives    for     us    they     must    be 

prompted     by    the     strongest 

motive,   even   the   promise  of 

freedom.     And    the    promise, 

being  made,  must  be  kept. 

The  signs  look  better.  The 
Father  of  Waters  again  goes 
unvexed  to  the. sea.  Thanks 
to  the  great  Northwest  for  it. 
Nor  yet  wholly  to  them. 
Three  hundred  miles  up  they 
met  New  England,  Empire, 
Keystone,  and  Jersey,  hewing 

186 


their  way  right  and  left.  The 
sunny  South,  too,  in  more 
colors  than  one,  also  lent  a 
hand.  On  the  spot,  their  part 
of  the  history  was  jotted  down 
in  black  and  white.  The  job 
was  a  great  national  one,  and 
let  none  be  banned  who  bore 
an  honorable  part  in  it.  And 
while  those  who  have  cleared 
the  great  river  may  well  be 
proud,  even  that  is  not  all. 
It  is  hard  to  say  that  anything 
has  been  more  bravely  and 
well  done  than  at  Antietam, 
Murfreesboro,  Gettysburg,  and 
on  many  fields  of  lesser  note. 
Nor  must  Uncle  Sam's  web- 
feet  be  forgotten.  At  all  the 
watery  margins  they  have  been 
present.  Not  only  on  the  deep 
sea,  the  broad  bay,  and  the 
rapid  river,  but  also  up  the 
narrow,  muddv  bayou,  and 
wherever  the  ground  was  a  lit- 
tle damp,  they  have  been  and 

187 


made  their  tracks.  Thanks  to 
all :  for  the  great  republic — for 
the  principle  it  lives  by  and 
keeps  alive— for  man's  vast  fu- 
ture—  thanks  to  all. 

Peace  does  not  appear  so 
distant  as  it  did.  I  hope  it 
will  come  soon,  and  come  to 
stay ;  and  so  come  as  to  be 
worth  the  keeping  in  all  future 
time.  It  will  then  have  been 
proved  that  among  free  men 
there  can  be  no  successful  ap- 
peal from  the  ballot  to  the  bul- 
let, and  that  they  who  take  such 
appeal  are  sure  to  lose  their 
case  and  pay  the  cost.  And 
then  there  will  be  some  black 
men  who  can  remember  that 
with  silent  tongue,  and  clenched 
teeth,  and  steady  eye,  and  well- 
poised  bayonet,  they  have 
helped  mankind  on  to  this 
great  consummation,  while  I 
fear  there  will  be  some  white 
ones  unable  to  forget  that  with 

188 


malignant  heart  and  deceitful 
speech  they  strove  to  hinder  it. 
Still,  let  us  not  be  over-san- 
guine of  a  speedy  final  triumph. 
Let  us  be  quite  sober.  Let  us 
diligently  apply  the  means, 
never  doubting  that  a  just  God, 
in  his  own  good  time,  will  give 
us  the  rightful  result. 

Yours  very  truly, 

A.  Lincoln. 


189 


XXXIV 

THE    GETTYSBURG    ADDRESS 
November  19,  1863. 

Fourscore  and  seven  years 
ago  our  fathers  brought  forth 
on  this  continent  a  new  nation, 
conceived  in  liberty,  and  dedi- 
cated to  the  proposition  that 
all  men  are  created  equal. 

Now  we  are  engaged  in  a 
great  civil  war,  testing  whether 
that  nation,  or  any  nation  so 
conceived  and  so  dedicated, 
can  long  endure.  We  are  met 
on  a  great  battle-field  of  that 
war.  We  have  come  to  dedi- 
cate a  portion  of  that  field  as 
a  final  resting-place  for  those 
who  here  gave  their  lives  that 
that  nation  might  live.     It   is 

190 


altogether  fitting    and  proper 
that  we  should  do  this. 

But,  in  a  larger  sense,  we 
cannot  dedicate — we  cannot 
consecrate — we  cannot  hallow 
— this  ground.  The  brave 
men,  living  and  dead,  who 
struggled  here,  have  conse- 
crated it  far  above  our  poor 
power  to  add  or  detract.  The 
world  will  little  note  nor  long 
remember  what  we  say  here, 
but  it  can  never  forget  what 
they  did  here.  It  is  for  us,  the 
living,  rather,  to  be  dedicated 
here  to  the  unfinished  work 
which  they  who  fought  here 
have  thus  far  so  nobly  ad- 
vanced. It  is  rather  for  us  to 
be  here  dedicated  to  the  great 
task  remaining  before  us  —  that 
from  these  honored  dead  we 
take  increased  devotion  to  that 
cause  for  which  they  gave  the 
last  full  measure  of  devotion  ; 
that  we  here  highly  resolve  that 

191 


these  dead  shall  not  have  dier1 
in  vain  ;  that  this  nation,  und 
God,  shall  have  a  new  birth 
freedom  ;  and  that  governme 
of  the  people,  by  the  people,  I 
the  people,  shall  not  perish  fn 
the  earth. 


o 


i&z 


XXXV 

RESPONSE    TO    A    SERENADE 

November  10,  1864. 

It  has  long  been  a  grave  ques- 
tion whether  any  government, 
not  too  strong  for  the  liberties 

f  its  people,  can  be  strong 
enough  to  maintain  its  existence 
in  great  emergencies.  On  this 
point  the  present  rebellion 
brought  our  republic  to  a 
severe  test,  and  a  Presidential 
election  occurring  in  regular 
course  during  the  rebellion 
added  not  a  little  to  the  strain. 
If  the  loyal  people  united 
were  put  to  the  utmost  of  their 
strength  by  the  rebellion,  must 
thev  not  fail  when  divided  and 
partially  paralyzed  by  a  polit- 

cal  war  among  themselves? 
13  193 


But  the  election  was  a  ne- 
cessity.     VVe  cannot  have  free 
government  without  elections  ; 
and  if  the  rebellion  could  force 
us   to   forego    or    postpone    a 
national  election,  it  might  fairly 
claim   to     have    already   con- 
quered  and    ruined    us'     The 
strife    of   the   election    is    but 
human   nature   practically   ap- 
plied to  the  facts  of  the'case. 
What  has  occurred  in  this  case 
must  ever  recur  in  similar  cases. 
Human  nature  will  not  change. 
In   any   future   great   national 
trial,  compared  with  the  men 
of  this,  we  shall  have  as  weak 
and  as  strong,  as  silly  and  as 
wise,  as  bad  and  as  good.     Let 
us,    therefore,  studv    the  inci- 
dents of  this  as  philosophy  to 
learn   wisdom  from,  and  none 
of  them   as  wrongs  to  be  re- 
venged. 

But  the  election,  along  with 
its   incidental   and  undesirable 


194 


strife,  has  done  good  too.  It 
has  demonstrated  that  a  peo- 
ple's government  can  sustain  a 
national  election  in  the  midst 
of  a  great  civil  war.  Until 
now  it  has  not  been  known 
to  the  world  that  this  was  a 
possibility.  It  shows,  also, 
how  sound  and  how  strong 
we  still  are.  It  shows  that, 
even  among  candidates  of  the 
same  party,  he  who  is  most  de- 
voted to  the  Union  and  most 
opposed  to  treason  can  receive 
most  of  the  people's  votes.  It 
shows,  also,  to  the  extent  yet 
known,  that  we  have  more 
men  now  than  we  had  when  the 
war  began.  Gold  is  good  in  its 
place,  but  living,  brave,  patri- 
otic men  are  better  than  gold. 
But  the  rebellion  continues, 
and  now  that  the  election  is 
over,  may  not  all  having  a 
common  interest  reunite  in  a 
common    effort    to    save    our 

195 


common  country?  For  my 
own  part,  I  have  striven  and 
shall  strive  to  avoid  placing  any 
obstacle  in  the  way.  So  long 
as  I  have  been  here  I  have  not 
willingly  planted  a  thorn  in  any 
man's  bosom.  While  I  am 
deeply  sensible  to  the  high 
compliment  of  a  reelection,  and 
duly  grateful,  as  I  trust,  to  Al- 
mighty God  for  having  di- 
rected mv  countrvmen  to  a 
right  conclusion,  as  I  think,  for 
their  own  good,  it  adds  no- 
thing to  my  satisfaction  that 
any  other  man  may  be  disap- 
pointed or  pained  by  the  result. 
May  I  ask  those  who  have 
not  differed  with  me  to  join 
with  me  in  this  same  spirit  to- 
ward those  who  have?  And 
now  let  me  close  by  asking 
three  hearty  cheers  for  our 
brave  soldiers  and  seamen 
and  their  gallant  and  skilful 
commanders. 

196 


XXXVI 

LETTER    OF    CONDOLENCE    TO 

MRS.    BIXBY   OF    BOSTON, 

MASSACHUSETTS 

November  21,  1864. 

Dear  Madam ;  I  have  been 
shown  in  the  files  of  the  War 
Department  a  statement  of  the 
Adjutant-General  of  Massa- 
chusetts that  you  are  the 
mother  of  five  sons  who  have 
died  gloriously  on  the  field  of 
battle.  I  feel  how  weak  and 
fruitless  must  be  anv  words  of 
mine  which  should  attempt  to 
beguile  you  from  the  grief  of  a 
loss  so  overwhelming.  But  I 
cannot  refrain  from  tendering 
to  you  the  consolation  that  may 

197 


be  found  in  the  thanks  of  the 
Republic  they  died  to  save.  I 
pray  that  our  heavenly  Father 
may  assuage  the  anguish  of 
your  bereavement,  and  leave 
you  only  the  cherished  memory 
of  the  loved  and  lost,  and  the 
solemn  pride  that  must  be 
yours  to  have  laid  so  costly  a 
sacrifice  upon  the  altar  of  free- 
dom. 

Yours  very  sincerely 
and  respectfully, 
Abraham  Lincoln. 


198 


XXXVII 

SECOND  INAUGURAL  ADDRESS 
March  4,  1865. 

Fellow-country ?neii  :  At  this 
second  appearing  to  take  the 
oath  of  the  Presidential  office, 
there  is  less  occasion  for  an 
extended  address  than  there 
was  at  the  first.  Then  a  state- 
ment, somewhat  in  detail,  of  a 
course  to  be  pursued,  seemed 
fitting  and  proper.  Now,  at 
the  expiration  of  four  years, 
during  which  public  declara- 
tions have  been  constantly 
called  forth  on  every  point  and 
phase  of  the  great  contest 
which  still  absorbs  the  atten- 
tion and  engrosses  the  energies 
of  the  nation,  little  that  is  new 

199 


could  be  presented.  The  prog- 
ress of  our  arms,  upon  which 
all  else  chiefly  depends,  is  as 
well  known  to  the  public  as  to 
myself;  and  it  is,  I  trust,  rea- 
sonably satisfactory  and  en- 
couraging to  all.  With  high 
hope  for  the  future,  no  pre- 
diction in  regard  to  it  is  ven- 
tured. 

On  the  occasion  correspond- 
ing to  this  four  years  ago,  all 
thoughts  were  anxiously  di- 
rected to  an  impending  civil 
war.  All  dreaded  it — all 
sought  to  avert  it.  While  the 
inaugural  address  was  being  de- 
livered from  this  place,  devoted 
altogether  to  saving  the  Union 
without  war,  insurgent  agents 
were  in  the  city  seeking  to  de- 
stroy it  without  war — seeking 
to  dissolve  the  Union,  and  di- 
vide effects,  by  negotiation. 
Both  parties  deprecated  war; 
but  one  of  them  would  make 

200 


war  rather  than  let  the  nation 
survive ;  and  the  other  would 
accept  war  rather  than  let  it 
perish.     And  the  war  came. 

One  eighth  of  the  whole 
population  were  colored  slaves, 
not  distributed  generally  over 
the  Union,  but  localized  in  the 
southern  part  of  it.  These 
slaves  constituted  a  peculiar 
and  powerful  interest.  All 
knew  that  this  interest  was, 
somehow,  the  cause  of  the  war. 
To  strengthen,  perpetuate,  and 
extend  this  interest  was  the 
object  for  which  the  insurgents 
would  rend  the  Union,  even  by 
war ;  while  the  government 
claimed  no  right  to  do  more 
than  to  restrict  the  territorial 
enlargement  of  it. 

Neither  party  expected  for 
the  war  the  magnitude  or  the 
duration  which  it  has  already 
attained.  Neither  anticipated 
that  the  cause  of  the  conflict 

201 


might  cease  with,  or  even  be- 
fore, the  conflict  itself  should 
cease.  Each  looked  for  an 
easier  triumph,  and  a  result  less 
fundamental  and  astounding. 
Both  read  the  same  Bible,  and 
pray  to  the  same  God;  and  each 
invokes  his  aid  against  the 
other.  It  may  seem  strange 
that  any  men  should  dare  to 
ask  a  just  God's  assistance  in 
wringing  their  bread  from  the 
sweat  of  other  men's  faces  ;  but 
let  us  judge  not,  that  we  be  not 
judged.  The  prayers  of  both 
could  not  be  answered — that 
of  neither  has  been  answered 
fully. 

The  Almighty  has  his  own 
purposes.  "Woe  unto  the 
world  because  of  offenses!  for 
it  must  needs  be  that  offenses 
come  ;  but  woe  to  that  man  by 
whom  the  offense  oometh !  "  If 
we  shall  suppose  that  American 
slaverv  is  one  of  those  offenses 


202 


which,  in  the  providence  of 
God,  must  needs  come,  but 
which,  having  continued 
through  his  appointed  time,  he 
now  wills  to  remove,  and  that 
he  gives  to  both  North  and 
South  this  terrible  war,  as  the 
woe  due  to  those  by  whom  the 
offense  came,  shall  we  discern 
therein  any  departure  from 
those  divine  attributes  which 
the  believers  in  a  living  God 
always  ascribe  to  him  ?  Fondly 
do  we  hope — fervently  do  we 
pray — that  this  mighty  scourge 
of  war  may  speedily  pass  away. 
Yet,  if  God  wills  that  it  con- 
tinue until  all  the  wealth  piled 
by  the  bondman's  two  hundred 
and  fifty  years  of  unrequited 
toil  shall  be  sunk,  and  until 
every  drop  of  blood  drawn  with 
the  lash  shall  be  paid  bv  an- 
other drawn  with  the  sword,  as 
was  said  three  thousand  years 
ago,  so  still  it  must  be   said, 

203 


"  The  judgments  of  the  Lord 
are  true,  and  righteous  alto- 
gether." 

With  malice  toward  none ; 
with  charitv  for  all ;  with  firm- 
ness  in  the  right,  as  God  gives 
us  to  see  the  right,  let  us  strive 
on  to  finish  the  work  we  are 
in ;  to  bind  up  the  nation's 
wounds ;  to  care  for  him  who 
shall  have  borne  the  battle,  and 
for  his  widow,  and  his  orphan 
— to  do  all  which  mav  achieve 
and  cherish  a  just  and  lasting 
peace  among  ourselves,  and 
with  all  nations. 


204 


